Kirtan @ Krishnapada Kumbhakar vs Unknown
2022 Latest Caselaw 973 Cal

03.03.2022

Srimanta Ct.No.42

CRA (SB)/25/2022

(Via Video Conference)

In Re : An application for admission of appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Bandwan Police Station Case No. 71/2018 dated 20.08.2018 under Sections 448/324/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

In the matter of : Kirtan @ Krishnapada Kumbhakar.

...appellant.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Adv., Mr. Sougato Mitra, Adv., Ms. Safia Nesar, Adv., Mr. Santanu Seth, Adv.

...for the appellant.

Appeal be admitted.

Issue usual notices.

Call for Lower Court Record.

Realization of fine amount be suspended till the disposal of the appeal.

It appears from the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence that the appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years with fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, further simple imprisonment for three months for committing an offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. It is provided in Section 389 (3) that "where the convicted person satisfies the Court by which he is convicted though he intends to present the appeal, the Court shall - (i) where such person being on bail is sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding

three years, (ii) where the offence of which such person has been convicted is a bailable one and he is on bail, order that the convicted person be released on bail, unless there are special reasons for refusing bail for such period as will afford sufficient time to present the appeal and obtain the orders of the Appellate Court under Sub-section (1); and the sentence of imprisonment shall, so long as he is so released on bail, be deemed to be suspended. The last paragraph of the impugned judgment shows that the Learned Sessions Judge, Purulia recorded in his judgment that the convict, Kirtan @ Krishnapada Kumbhakar submits in open Court that he will engage Lawyer of his own choice and does not want appointment of any Lawyer from District Legal Services Authority to prefer appeal against the order of conviction before the Hon'ble Court".

The above observation made in the judgment by the Learned Sessions Judge clearly suggests that the appellant intended to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment and order of conviction.

Strangely enough, the Learned Sessions Judge did not take recourse of Section 389(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In view of the fact that the appellant was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a period of three years with fine and default clause for committing offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, he is automatically entitled to bail.

The appellant is enlarged on bail of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purulia with further condition that if on bail he shall attend the Court of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate once in a month during pendency of the instant appeal.

( Bibek Chaudhuri, J. )