Jharkhand High Court
Jitendra Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1080 of 2018
Jitendra Munda --- --- 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. Vijay Kr. Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P
---
08 / 10.08.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha and
learned A.P.P Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha on the renewed prayer for suspension of
sentence made by this appellant through I.A. No. 2070/2021.
2. The appellant along with one Mangleshwar Oraon stand convicted for
the offence punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code by the
impugned judgment dated 21.07.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No. 138/2016 by
the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Lohardaga and this appellant has been
awarded life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and default sentence,
while the other convict Mangleshwar Oraon who has been previously convicted
in another Sessions Trial case, was also awarded life imprisonment which shall
not be less than twenty years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and default sentence by
the impugned order of sentence of the same date.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that after the prayer for bail of
this appellant was rejected on 21.01.2019, co-convict Mangleshwar Oraon has
been enlarged on bail by another Coordinate Bench on 27.01.2020 in Cr.
Appeal (DB) No. 207/2019. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
case of this appellant stands on similar footing with that of Mangleshwar Oraon.
Therefore, appellant who has remained in custody since 21.07.2018, may be
enlarged on bail.
4. Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer. He submits that the case of the
appellant was considered on merits after receipt of the lower court records by
the Coordinate Bench of this Court and his prayer for bail was rejected taking
into account the evidence of I.O and that the present appellant was apprehended
and had confessed his guilt. The FSL report also confirmed that bullets fired
upon the deceased were fired from the same weapon. The weapon was also
recovered. Moreover, there are criminal antecedent against this appellant also
and he is in custody only for about three years by now.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and taken note of the materials on record relied upon by them from the lower
court records including the period of custody undergone by the appellant as also
the order dated 27.01.2020 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.
Appeal (DB) No. 207/2019 in the case of Mangleshwar Oraon. Having regard
to the totality of the facts and circumstances and that the prayer for bail of this
appellant was earlier rejected by the Coordinate Bench after consideration of
the materials on record by order dated 21.01.2019 and that there are criminal
antecedent against the appellant, we are not inclined to enlarge him on bail by
suspending his sentence, at this stage. Accordingly, I.A. No. 2070/2021 is
rejected.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Ranjeet/
