Ganesh Gorain vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2731 Jhar

                                        1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                              Cr. Revision No. 822 of 2012

           1.
            Ganesh Gorain, son of late Shashi Gorai
           2.
            Guhi Ram Gorain, son of late Jyoti Gorain
           3.
            Ravi Gorain, son of Ganesh Gorain
           4.
            Tulsi Gorain, son of Ganesh Gorain
           5.
            Prahlad Gorain, son of late Muchi Ram Gorain,
            All are residents of village-Manpur, P.O. and P.S. Chandakiyari,
            Distt. Bokaro              ...     ...     ...    Petitioners
                                Versus
         The State of Jharkhand              ...     ...    Opp. Party
                                 ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate

Through Video Conferencing

10/05.08.2021

1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 23.7.2012, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2012, by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro by which the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioners against the order of the learned trial court.

The learned Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro vide judgment dated 18.02.2012, passed in G.R. No. 536 of 2001, Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 40/2001 had convicted the petitioners under Sections 147/148/323/324/341 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioners have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 147 IPC, simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 323 IPC, simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 341 IPC.

The learned Appellate Court has modified the conviction

passed by the learned trial court and modified the sentence by giving benefit of Probation of Offenders Act and the petitioners were directed to furnish bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each for a period of two years under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Sanjay Kumar submits that the appellate court had modified the sentence of the petitioners by asking the petitioners to furnish the bond. He submits that he does not want to press the present revision application.

3. Learned counsel for the State Mr. Ravi Prakash does not have any objection to the prayer made.

4. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed as not pressed.

5. Pending I.A., if any, stands dismissed as not pressed.

6. Let the records of the case be immediately sent back to the learned court below.

7. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Binit/