Allowed

Rukiya Bibi v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC10 Aug 2025I.A.(Crl.)/857/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court, exercising jurisdiction under Section 430 BNSS, 2023, suspended the sentence of the appellant convicted under Sections 304 Part-II, 308, and 323 IPC read with Section 34. Relying on the principle that suspension can be considered liberally for fixed sentences, the court granted bail pending the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of sentence and release on fresh bail subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety.

Rukiya Bibi Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010170662025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/857/2025

¶6

RUKIYA BIBI W/O. ABDUR RASHID R/O. NO. 2 GORAIMARI P/S. PANBARI DIST. CHIRANG ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP ASSAM

¶8

-----------Advocate for : B BARMAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶9

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Date : --11.08.2025

¶12

Heard Mr. H. Ali, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party-respondent State.

¶13

The instant application under Section 430 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

preferred by the applicant-appellant seeking suspension of execution of the sentence passed against her and for her release on bail.

¶16

The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal, Criminal Appeal no. 302/2025 against a Judgment and Order dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijni at Chirang [‘the Trial Court’, for short] in Sessions Case no. 22 [P]/2021 and Sessions Case no. 12 [P]/2022. By the Judgment and Order dated 11.07.2025, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences under Section 304 Part-II/308/323, Indian Penal Code [IPC] read with Section 34, IPC. For the offence under Section 304 Part-II, IPC read with Section 34, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 [three] years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-, with default stipulations. For the offence under Section 308, IPC read with Section 34, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 [three] years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 30 [thirty] days. For the offence under Section 323, IPC read with Section 34, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 [one] year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulations. All the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

¶17

Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that the learned Trial Court has erred to infer common intention on the part of the applicant-appellant. As the learned Trial Court was not fully convinced as regards presence of common intention on the part of the applicant-appellant, the sentence passed under Section 304 Part-II, IPC has been relaxed in the case of the applicant-appellant.

¶18

Mr. R.R. Kaushik has submitted that if the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences under Section 304 Part-II, IPC in aid of Section 34, IPC, then, as per law, each of the persons is liable for the act in the same manner as if the act were done by him/her alone.

¶19

Be that as it may, the applicant-appellant is found sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 [three] years for the offences under Section 304 Part-II, IPC and Section 308, IPC in aid of Section 34, IPC.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai vs. State of Gujarat reported in [1999] 4 SCC 421 , has held that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed period of sentence and when he files an appeal under any statutory right, suspension of sentence can be considered by the appellate court liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances.

¶22

Having considered the period of sentence passed against the applicant-appellant, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has made out a prima facie case for suspension of sentence pending disposal of the appeal.

¶23

It is, therefore, ordered that pending disposal of appeal, execution of the sentence passed against the applicant-appellant shall remain suspended and the applicant-appellant is allowed to be released on fresh bail subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶24

The interlocutory application stands disposed of in the afore-state terms.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Rukiya Bibi v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rukiya Bibi v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Sarkar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Raju Borah Vs the State of Assam

Biswajit Mahanta Vs the State of Assam

Prabin Paul @ Probin Paul Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Abdul Jabbar and Anr. Vs Farida Yasmin

Nehru Chhetry Vs the State of Assam and Anr.