Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Arshed Sk vs Unknown on 25 February, 2026

     42
 25-02-2026
(Court NO. 8)
   KOLE
  266045
                                      CRA (DB) 102 of 2024
                                               with
                                       IA No. CRAN 2 of 2025


                In re: Applications for suspension of sentence under Section 389 of
                the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 430 of the BNSS filed in
                connection with Chandannagar Police Station Case No. 23 of 2011
                under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of
                the Arms Act.
                                              -And-

                In the matter of : Arshed Sk
                                                                        .... Appellant.
                Mr. Subir Ahmed,
                Mr. A. Saha,
                                                                  ... for the appellant.

                Mr. Debasish Roy,
                Mr. Sandip Chakraborty,
                Mr. A. Mukherjee,
                                                                       ... for the State.


                                    Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J:-


                 1.

Conduct report and custody certificate filed by the State be kept with the records.

2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner says that his client is in custody for almost 15 years. From the custody certificate we see that indeed the petitioner is in custody for a few days short of 15 years. The petitioner prays for suspension of sentence saying that the appeal is not even ready for hearing.

3. Learned State Advocate opposes the prayer. He says that there an is eye-witness to the alleged incident of murder. No leniency should be shown to the petitioner.

4. We are presently not on the merits of the case. The petitioner is in custody for a very long period of time, taking into account both pre-conviction and post-conviction detention periods. 2 From a departmental note dated January 20, 2026, we see that the department has not received the trial court records. Therefore, the question of an early hearing of the appeal does not arise.

5. From the conduct report, we find that the behavior and conduct of the petitioner has been satisfactory and there is no adverse report against him.

6. Without touching the merits of the case and solely on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, we feel impelled to allow this application for suspension of sentence.

7. Accordingly the appellant, namely, Arshed Sk, shall be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M, Chandannagore, Hooghly and on further condition that the appellant shall not leave the geographical limits of district Malda and on further conditions that the appellant shall meet the Inspector-in-Charge of the concerned police station once a month until further orders and further that the appellant shall be personally present or be represented before this Court when the appeal is taken up for hearing.

8. The operation of the order of conviction and sentence shall remain suspended till disposal of the appeal or until further orders, whichever is earlier. We also stay the operation of payment of fine till disposal of the appeal.

9. The Department is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Superintendent of the concerned Correctional Home for immediate release of the applicants/appellants unless he is wanted in connection with any other case.

3

10. We clarify that the observations made by us in this order are only for the purpose of disposing of the application for suspension of sentence and the same shall have no relevance at the final hearing of the appeal.

11. The application for suspension of sentence is, thus, disposed of.

In Re: CRA (DB) 102 of 2024:

12. From a departmental note dated January 20, 2026, we find that the department called for the trial court records vide memo dated July 11, 2024, followed by a reminder dated January 20, 2025. As on January 20, 2026, the Department had still not received the trial court records.

13. Learned District and Sessions Judge, Hooghly shall file a report before us through the learned Registrar (Judicial Service) as regards why the trial court records have still not been transmitted to the department of this Court.

14. List this matter under the heading "To Be Mentioned" on March 6, 2026.

15. Learned Registrar (Judicial Service) is requested to immediately communicate this order to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Hooghly.

16. Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent photostat certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

( Apurba Sinha Ray, J. ) ( Arijit Banerjee, J. )