Manoj Kumar vs The State
2008 Latest Caselaw 2209 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+           Crl.M.(Bail) No.773/2008 in Crl. Appeal No.485/2008

%                        Date of Decision: 10.12.2008

                                                         .... Appellant
Manoj Kumar
                         Through Ms.Neelam Grover, Advocate

                                  Versus


The State                                               .... Respondent
                         Through Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI


1.    Whether reporters of Local papers may be                YES
      allowed to see the judgment?
2.    To be referred to the reporter or not?                  NO
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in              NO
      the Digest?



ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

This is an application by the applicant Manoj Kumar for

suspension of his sentence and his release on bail during the pendency

of his appeal. The applicant was allegedly found in possession of the

counterfeit currency note and he has been convicted under Section

489C of the Indian Penal Code for a period of five years rigorous

imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-.

The learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that the

offence under Section 489 C is bailable as defined in the First Schedule

regarding classification of offences under the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973.

The learned counsel for the applicant has further contended

relying on Section 389 (3) that he was on bail during the trial and since

the offence for which he was convicted was a bailable, after conviction

on his intention to file an appeal, he was entitled to be released on bail,

unless there were special reason for refusing the bail for such period as

would have afforded him sufficient time to present the appeal.

In the circumstances, it is contended that since the applicant was

entitled to be released on bail as the offence under Section 489 C for

which he has been convicted is bailable, for the period, affording him

sufficient time to present the appeal, even after presentation of the

appeal, considering the facts and circumstances that there are no

special reasons for refusing bail, the sentence of the applicant be

suspended and he be released on bail.

The learned counsel for State, Mr. Dudeja, contends that the

special circumstances for refusing the bail in such cases would be when

there is apprehension of the applicant involving himself in the same

offence again or such a person having previous history of conviction on

the similar grounds and for similar offences.

The applicant has made a specific averment that he is not a

previous convict nor habitual offender and is a permanent resident of

Delhi and has disclosed his permanent address which fact had been

verified to be correct and he was on bail during trial. There are no

allegation of applicant exploiting the liberty granted to him in any

manner. Therefore, there are no such special circumstances which will

entail refusing of bail to him.

In the aforesaid circumstances and for the forgoing reasons, the

appellant / applicant Mr. Manoj Kumar is entitled for suspension of

sentence during the pendency of appeal. Therefore, the remaining

sentence of the applicant is suspended during the pendency of the

appeal and the applicant Manoj Kumar be released on bail on his

furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like

amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The appellant / applicant

shall surrender his Passport, in case he has any and he will not leave

India without prior permission of this Court. With these directions, the

application is disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti under the signature of the Court

Master and be also sent to the concerned jail authorities.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

December 10, 2008                                        V.K. SHALI, J.
mk