S.Meganathan v. The State

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR *** CRM (DB)/13/2023 with CRA(DB)/3/2023 IA No. CRAN/2/2023 S.Meganathan Vs.

The State Mr. Prohit Mohan Lal ... for the appellant Mr. A. S.Zinu ... for the State July 17, 2023 [AKB] Item No.3 & 4 Re: CRM (DB)/3/2023:

This is an application for an order of suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending appeal against an order of conviction and sentence. The appellant has been convicted of an offence under Section 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code (Provisions prior to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013.

Mr. Lall, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that there are fatal contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses. The appellant was granted bail after ninety seven days of custody. He has all along complied with the conditions of bail. There is also no possibility towards early disposal of the appeal. His parents are also suffering from several ailments. In the said conspectus, the appellant's prayer needs to be considered liberally.

Ms. A.S. Zinu, learned advocate appearing for the State, however, opposes the appellant's prayer and submits that the gravity of the offence needs to be taken into consideration. There is no inconsistency or contradiction in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

The sequence of incidents clearly establishes the involvement of the appellant in the offence. We have heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and have assessed the quality of the evidence as recoded by the learned Court below. Prima facie the evidence on record clearly establishes the guilt and considering the severity of the offence, we are not inclined to allow the appellant's prayer for bail.

The application being CRM (DB)/13/2023 is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.) (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)