Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/144/2023 of HITESH BARMAN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. on 6 May 2026
GAHC010039332023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/144/2023 HITESH BARMAN S/O SWATI BARMAN R/O DOLOIGAON BHATIPARA P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY P.P. ASSAM.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010039332023
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/144/2023
HITESH BARMAN
S/O SWATI BARMAN
R/O DOLOIGAON
BHATIPARA
P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REP. BY P.P.
ASSAM.
2:KALPANA GHOSH
W/O CHITU GHOSH
VILL.- BHAKARIVITA
P.O.- BHAKARIVITA
P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 783380.
------------
Advocate for : MR. A R SIKDAR
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
07.05.2026 (M. Zothankhuma, J)
Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Ms. M. Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent no.2. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C for suspension of the sentence passed in pursuant to the impugned judgment dated 10.01.2023 by the learned Special Judge, Bongaigaon, in Special (P) Case No.13 (BGN)/2020, arising out of Bongaigaon P.S. Case No.04/2020, convicting the applicant/appellant under Section 376(3) IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The sentence has been awarded under Section 376(3) IPC only in view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act. At the outset, it has been mentioned by the parties that Paper Book has been received by them and the appeal is ready for hearing. As the appeal is fixed for hearing on 19.05.2026, the parties submit that it would be best if the interlocutory application is closed, as the rights of the parties would be known at the time of the disposal of the main appeal. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, the I.A.(Crl.) is accordingly closed, due to the reasons stated above.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant