Jharkhand High Court
Azad Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1249 of 2016
Azad Khan ....Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo
Through Video Conferencing
For the Appellant : Mr. Arwind Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, A.P.P.
---
11/13.08.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Arwind Kumar and learned
counsel for the State, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
Appellant, Azad Khan has preferred I.A No. 271 of 2020 for suspension
of sentence against the impugned judgment of conviction dated 09.09.2016 and
order of sentence dated 21.09.2016 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions
Judge, F.T.C, Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial No. 264 of 2009.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that though the
appellant has been charged under Sections 498-A, 304-B & 302 of I.P.C, but the
trial court has convicted the appellant for the charges under Sections 302 and
498A of I.P.C. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that on the
basis of Fardbeyan of the victim, F.I.R has been lodged, but the Police Officer,
who has recorded the Fardbeyan, has not been examined in this case. As per the
evidence of the witnesses, the injured was not in a condition to speak and as such
placing reliance upon such dying declaration by learned trial court is bad in law,
which has caused serious prejudice to the appellant. Learned counsel for the
appellant has further submitted that even the daughter of the deceased has not
supported the case of the prosecution. The appellant has remained in custody for
more than 10 years in total. Therefore, appellant may be enlarged on bail by
suspending his sentence.
Learned counsel for the State, Mr. Ravi Prakash submits that though
Fardbeyan was recorded by another Police Officer, S.I, namely, T.N. Mishra of
Bariatu Police Station at RIMS, Ranchi but the F.I.R. has been lodged at
Chandrapura Police Station in the district of Bokaro as the place of occurrence is
the district of Bokaro. The Investigating Officer of the case, Md. Usman Ansari
has been examined as P.W.5, who has submitted charge-sheet on 24.07.2009, in
which T.N. Mishra has been shown as charge-sheet witness in this case at Sr. No.
7. Appellant has not brought any material on record during cross-examination of
the Investigating Officer, Md. Usman Ansari that any prejudice has been caused
to him because of non-examination of Sub-Inspector, T.N.Mishra, who has
recorded the Fardbeyan. As such, appellant may not be enlarged on bail as it is a
serious offence, where the wife has alleged against the husband at the time of her
death that she was burnt by him. As such, this application may be dismissed.
Considering the rival submission of the parties and looking into the
facts and circumstances of the case and that the F.I.R is based upon the
Fardbeyan of the victim itself, we are not inclined to enlarge the appellant on
bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
However, since the appellant has remained in custody for more than 10
years, it is directed that the case may be listed for Hearing in the next month
before the appropriate Bench considering the period of custody of the appellant.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J)
Jk/
