Hage Chailyang and Anr. Vs The State of Ap and… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Gauhati HC (2025)

Hage Chailyang and Anr. Vs The State of Ap and… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suspension of the impugned judgment and order dated 06.08.2025 of the Sessions Court, Ziro pending final consideration of the connected appeal; applicants permitted to remain on bail on the same terms and conditions as the Trial Court's common order dated 14.08.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment and order dated 06.08.2025 of the learned Sessions Court, Ziro convicting and sentencing the applicants under Sections 304 Part-II/325/342 IPC should be suspended pending final consideration of the connected appeal, and on what bail terms the applicants should remain at liberty.

Court's answer

Pending final consideration of the appeal, the impugned judgment and order dated 06.08.2025 of the learned Sessions Court, Ziro stand suspended, the Court having regard to the applicants having been on bail during the trial proceedings, the limited one-month post-conviction bail granted by the Trial Court, and the nature of the offence and the sentence imposed.

Ratio / Principle

The applicants are allowed to remain on bail pending the appeal on the same terms and conditions imposed by the learned Trial Court vide its common order dated 14.08.2025.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Itanagar Bench), Nelson Sailo J. (order dated 12.09.2025): Allowed IA(Crl)/91/2025 seeking suspension of sentence. Applicants Hage Chailyang and Smti Hage Meena, convicted by the learned Sessions Court, Ziro in Sessions Case No.31/2020 (Z) (Ziro P.S Case No.79/2007) under Sections 304 Part-II/325/342 IPC by judgment and order dated 06.08.2025 (signed 14.08.2025) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 3 years with a fine of Rs.20,000 (S.304 Part-II IPC), 2 years with a fine of Rs.5,000 (S.325 IPC) and simple imprisonment of 6 months without fine (S.342 IPC), to run concurrently, had been granted post-conviction bail by the Trial Court only for one month vide common order dated 14.08.2025. Having regard to their having been on bail throughout the trial, the limited post-conviction bail, and the nature of the offence and sentence — and after perusing the Apex Court authority in Atul @ Asuthosh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2024) Supreme (SC) 880 referred by the learned Public Prosecutor — the Court suspended the impugned judgment and order pending final consideration of the connected appeal and directed that the applicants remain on bail on the same terms and conditions as the Trial Court's common order dated 14.08.2025.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC040015672025

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

Case No. : IA(Crl)/91/2025

Hage Chailyang and Anr Age: 55 Occupation : Address:Son of Late Hage Kojee resident of Hari Village Po and PS Ziro Lower Subansiri District Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Smti Hage Meena Age: 51 Occupation : Address:Wife of Shri Hage Chailyang resident of Hari Village PO and PS Ziro Lower Subansiri District Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and Anr Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by the PP of AP 2:Smti Ngilyang Yana Age: 0 Occupation : Address:Wife of Late Ngilyang Sai resident of Medical Road Hapoli PO and PS Ziro Lower Subansiri District Arunachal Pradesh. -----------Advocate for : Rajesh Sonar

Page No.# 2/3

Advocate for : P P of AP appearing for The State of AP and Anr: Advocate , appearing for 2, respectively.

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO O R D E R

12.09.2025

Heard Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the applicants, who submits that by filing this interlocutory application, the applicants pray for suspension of the sentence imposed upon them vide judgment and order dated 06.08.2025 which was signed on 14.08.2025, passed by the learned Sessions Court, Ziro in Sessions Case No.31/2020 (Z), corresponding to Ziro P.S Case No.79/2007, convicting the applicants under Sections 304 Part-II/325/342 IPC. On their conviction, they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03(three) years with fine of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) for conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, rigorous imprisonment for 02(two) years with fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) for conviction under Section 325 IPC and simple imprisonment for 06(six) months without fine for conviction under Section 342 IPC and the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

2. Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have every chance to succeed in the appeal and they were on bail during the trial. He also submits that the learned Trial Court have even after convicting and sentencing the applicants have granted bail to them vide common order dated 14.08.2025. But the bail was only for a period of one month. He therefore submits that the impugned judgment and

Page No.# 3/3

order be suspended final consideration of the connected appeal.

3. Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor, Arunachal Pradesh appears for the State and submits that ordinarily bail is granted when there is no likelihood of the appeal being completed in a short time. He also refers to the judgment of the Apex Court in Atul @ Asuthosh –vs- State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2024) Supreme (SC) 880.

4. Submission is made by the learned counsel for the parties have been considered and also the authority relied upon has been perused.

5. Having regard to the fact that the applicants were on bail during the trial proceedings and even after the conviction and sentence the learned Trial Court had granted them bail, which of course was for a limited period of one month and also having regard to the nature of the offence and the sentence imposed upon the applicants, this Court is of the view that pending final consideration of the appeal, the impugned judgment and order be suspended. It is ordered accordingly.

6. The applicants are allowed to remain on bail on the same terms and conditions imposed by the learned Trial Court vide common order dated 14.08.2025.

7. Interlocutory application stands disposed of as allowed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant