Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/459/2026 of SANKAR KUMAR @ GAUTAM SONAR Vs STATE OF ASSAM on 22 September 2026
GAHC010085152026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/459/2026 SANKAR KUMAR @ GAUTAM SONAR S/O. LT. AKALU KUMAR, R/O. BAHIPUKHURI T.E. LINE NO. 12, P/S. MAZBAT, DIST. UDALGURI, BTR, ASSAM, PIN-784507 VERSUS STATE OF
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010085152026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/459/2026
SANKAR KUMAR @ GAUTAM SONAR
S/O. LT. AKALU KUMAR, R/O. BAHIPUKHURI T.E. LINE NO. 12, P/S.
MAZBAT, DIST. UDALGURI, BTR, ASSAM, PIN-784507
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z ALAM, MS. S NAZNEEN,MR. S K DAHAL,R ISLAM,P
ROY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 23.09.2026 Heard Mr. Z. Alam, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. This Interlocutory Application has been preferred seeking suspension of the sentence of 10 years and a fine of Rs.20,000/- i/d SI for two months pursuant to the conviction of the petitioner under Section 376 IPC.
Page No.# 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim girl had unfortunately expired before her evidence could be recorded and there is no other eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The fact of expiry of the victim girl before her evidence could be recorded is not disputed. On perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that the learned Court below has stated the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as substantive evidence and the conviction appears to be based primarily on the same statement. Objection filed by the prosecution has been perused. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, I deem it fit to suspend the reminder of the sentence till disposal of the connected appeal. Accordingly, the judgment dated 27.03.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, Udalguri in Spl. (POCSO) Case No.123/2024 convicting the accused/petitioner under Section 376 IPC to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- shall stand suspended. I.A. stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant