Full Text
Date of Decision: 01.08.2011
SUKHBIR SINGH …… Appellant
Through:Mr. Sudhir Nandraj Jog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhay Kumar, Adv.
Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, APP.
JUDGMENT
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? NO V.K. SHALI, J. (oral) Crl. M. (B) No. 799/2011
1. This is an application for suspension of sentence and for enlargement of the appellant on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 2011:DHC:3844
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant was convicted for an offence under Section 7 and 13(1)
(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 vide the judgment and the order of sentence dated 27.01.2011 and 29.01.2011 respectively and sentenced to RI of two years and a fine of Rs.3,000/-. The appellant had filed an application bearing Crl. M. (B) No. 382/2011 for suspension of sentence which was dismissed by my learned Predecessor vide order dated 10.03.2011. Against the said order, the appellant had filed a special leave petition bearing no. 2403/2011 which was also dismissed on 16.03.2011. It has been contended that the appellant was in judicial custody from 10.09.2006 to 20.09.2006. After rejection of his bail application he surrendered on 21.03.2011 and is presently in judicial custody. It is stated that keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has already been in custody for almost seven or eight months, he may be extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail.
3. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the appellant and have gone through the record.
4. Since the earlier application for suspension of sentence of the appellant was dismissed by this Court on 10.03.2011 which got the seal of approval by the Apex Court on 16.03.2011, I feel that the present application for suspension of sentence does not deserve to be entertained at all. Moreover, there are no new circumstances which may warrant a fresh consideration of the prayer of the appellant for suspension of sentence and for enlargement on bail. Accordingly, the present application for suspension of sentence and enlargement of the appellant on bail is dismissed. However, keeping in view the fact that the appellant has been sentenced to a maximum period of two years, therefore, the hearing of the appeal be expedited. CRL. A. No. 295/2011 List in the category of ‘After Notice Misc. Matters’ on 22.11.2011. V.K. SHALI, J. August 01, 2011 KP