Guddu Goswami vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2688 Jhar

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 30 of 2021
            Guddu Goswami                                                        ....Appellant
                                           Versus
            The State of Jharkhand                                   ...           Respondent

            CORAM:         Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
                          Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
                          Through Video Conferencing
            For the Appellant        : Mr. Vishal Kumar Trivedi, Advocate
            For the State            : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P
                                            ---

05/03.08.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Vishal Kumar Trivedi and Mr. Saket Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the prayer for suspension of sentence made by this appellant through I.A. No. 3290 of 2021.

This appellant along with co-convicts, Vikash Singh @ Hatey, Panchu Gorai and Anda Raju @ Raju Paswan stand convicted for the charges under Sections 147,148,341/149, 324/149,326/149, 307/149 of I.P.C by the impugned judgment dated 28th September, 2020 passed in Sessions Trial No. 60 of 2019 by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur and all the convicts have been sentenced in the following manner, by the impugned order of sentence dated 29th September, 2020. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

             Sl.          Offences U/s                               Sentence
             No.
                                               Imprisonment              Fine          Default
             01.   Sections 307/149 of I.P.C   Imprisonment               --             --
                                               for Life
             02.   Sections 326/149 of I.P.C   R.I for ten(10) Rs.20,000/-      R.I.     for     six
                                               years              each          months each
             03.   Sections 324/149 of I.P.C   R.I for three(3) Rs.2,000/- each R.I.     for     two
                                               years                            months each
             04.   Sections 341/149 of I.P.C   S.I for one(1)             --             --
                                               month
             05.   Section 147                 R.I. for two(2)            --             --
                                               years
             06.   Section 148                 R.I for three(3)           --             --
                                               years

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the informant (P.W.2) has turned hostile though he was allegedly injured in the said occurrence. Prosecution

witness no. 1 has also turned hostile. P.Ws. 3,4,5,7 and 8 all have stated that Vikash Singh @ Hatey was firing. So far as this appellant and convict, Panchu Gorai is concerned, P.W. 3 has stated that they were riding the scooty so has P.W. 4, whereas P.W. 6 has not named the appellant, though he has named Panchu Gorai as the one, who was driving the bike. Even P.W. 4, the injured witness has stated that this appellant and Panchu Gorai were riding the bike, whereas Hatey had fired, which caused injury on the stomach. It is submitted that Panchu Gorai and Raju Paswan @ Anda Raju have been granted bail by suspending their sentence by Coordinate Bench of this Court by orders dated 15 th February, 2021 and 25th March, 2021 passed in Cr. Appeal (D.B) No. No. 582 of 2020 and Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 594 of 2020 (Annexures- 1 & 2 to the I.A.). The case of the appellant being similar to that of Panchu Gorai and Raju Paswan @ Anda Raju, he may also be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the relevant materials relied upon by them from the Lower Court Records.

Having regard to the fact that the case of the appellant stands on similar footing as that of convict, Panchu Gorai as the prosecution witnesses have only stated that they were riding the bike while firing was done by Hatey and that Panchu Gorai has been enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court, we are inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail by granting him the privilege of suspension of sentence. Accordingly, appellant, named above, shall be released on bail, during pendency of this appeal on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in connection with Sessions Trial No. 60 of 2019 with the condition that the appellant and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile number without permission of the learned Trial Court.

Consequently, I.A. No. 3290 of 2021 stands disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J) Jk/