Jharkhand High Court
Gangaram Munda @ Ganga Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 03 of 2017
1.Gangaram Munda @ Ganga Munda
2.Ganesh Hansda --- --- Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
For the Appellants : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P.
07/08.12.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Rajendra Prasad
Gupta and Mr. Tarun Kumar, learned A.P.P. on the prayer for suspension
of sentence made by the appellants through I.A. No. 5842 of 2021.
Both the appellants stand convicted for the offence punishable
under Section 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C by the
impugned judgment dated 30.11.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 96 of
2012 by the court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Seraikella-Kharsawan and have been sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.30,000/- each and a default sentence
each u/s 302/34 I.P.C and further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years
with a fine of Rs.5000/- each and a default sentence each u/s 201 I.P.C.
by the impugned order of sentence dated 07.12.2016. Both the sentences
were ordered to run concurrently.
Prayer for suspension of the appellants was rejected earlier by this
Court vide order dated 12.09.2017 upon consideration of the materials on
the lower court records. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
prayer has been renewed primarily on the ground of period of custody of
more than 10 years since 10.11.2011 when they were arrested. He submits
that case of the prosecution hinged on circumstantial evidence and at best
it was a case of last seen theory. No corroborative evidences were adduced
to connect these two appellants with the offence. Appeal is not likely to be
heard in near future. Therefore, appellants may be enlarged on bail by
suspending their sentence.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. He submits that it is a case
of double murder. Therefore, on consideration of the materials on record
and the findings of the learned Trial Court, prayer for suspension of
sentence of the appellants was declined earlier.
We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the grounds urged for renewal of the prayer for
suspension of sentence. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case noted above and the period of custody of more than 10 years
undergone by these appellants, we are inclined to grant the privilege of
suspension of sentence to these two appellants.
Accordingly, the appellants, named above, during the pendency of
this appeal, shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each, to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella-Kharsawan in connection with Sessions
Trial No. 96 of 2012 with the condition that appellants and their bailors
shall not change their address or mobile number without permission of
the learned Trial Court and that appellants as well as their bailors would
also submit the Aadhar Card before the court below at the time of
furnishing bail bonds.
I.A. No. 5842 of 2021 stands allowed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
A.Mohanty
