JUDGMENT : 1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of sentence dated 03.02.2018 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in connection with S.T. Case No.206 of 2016, arising out of Goilkera P.S. Case No.10 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. Case No.85 of 2016, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted under Section 396 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo additional R.I. for one year. The has further been convicted under Section 412 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years along with fine of Rs.10,000 and in default of payment of fine, he shall have to undergo additional R.I. for one year. Further, the appellant has been convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall have to undergo additional R.I. for one year. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that all the co-convicts, namely, Shankar Besra, Manoj Bhuiyan, Chaitan Lakra, Bima Pandu @ Vimal Pandu and Marshal Burh have been directed to be released on bail after suspension of sentence by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 05.04.2022, 09.11.2022, 29.06.2022, 08.08.2022 and 07.07.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.407 of 2018 (In I.A. No.10066 of 2019), 309 of 2022 (In I.A. No.3238 of 2022), 476 of 2018 (In I.A. No.6099 of 2021), 557 of 2018 ( In I.A No.6635 of 2022) and 666 of 2018 (In I.A. No. 3959 of 2022) respectively and in order to strengthen his argument, the copy of the orders passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court with respect to other co-convicts as referred above, have been appended in the instant interlocutory application. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the case of the present appellant is identically placed to that of the case of other co-convicts. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that it is therefore a fit case for suspension of sentence. 5. While on the other hand, learned Spl. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the case of the present appellant is identically placed to that of the case of other co-convicts. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that it is therefore a fit case for suspension of sentence. 5. While on the other hand, learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State although has raised objection with respect to involvement of present appellant so far as culpability said to be committed by him, but he is fair enough to admit the fact after going the orders appended in the instant interlocutory application as “Annexure-I” that the other co-convicts as referred above have been directed to be released on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court after suspension of their sentence. 6. This Court, after having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the findings recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned judgment, as also, the testimony of the witnesses along with other exhibits, as available in the Trial Court Records which has been examined in order to come to the conclusion as to whether the case of the present appellant is identically placed to that of the other co-convicts, namely, Shankar Besra, Manoj Bhuiyan, Chaitan Lakra, Bima Pandu @ Vimal Pandu and Marshal Burh who have been directed to be released on bail after suspension of sentence by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 05.04.2022, 09.11.2022, 29.06.2022, 08.08.2022 and 07.07.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.407 of 2018 (In I.A. No.10066 of 2019), 309 of 2022 (In I.A. No.3238 of 2022), 476 of 2018 (In I.A. No.6099 of 2021), 557 of 2018 ( In I.A No.6635 of 2022) and 666 of 2018 (In I.A. No. 3959 of 2022) respectively, is of the view that the case of the present appellant is identically placed to that of other co-convicts as referred above. 7. This Court, considering the aforesaid, is of the view that the instant interlocutory application needs to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, interlocutory application being I.A. No.2446 of2025 stands allowed. 9. In consequence thereof, the appellant, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. 8. Accordingly, interlocutory application being I.A. No.2446 of2025 stands allowed. 9. In consequence thereof, the appellant, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge- II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in connection with S.T. Case No.206 of 2016, arising out of Goilkera P.S. Case No.10 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. Case No.85 of 2016. 10. It is made clear that any observation made herein will not prejudice the issue on merit as the appeal is lying pending for its consideration.