Saqlain Ahmad vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4887 Jhar

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 171 of 2018
     Saqlain Ahmad                                          --- --- Appellant
                                    Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                                 --- --- Respondent
                                    .......

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY For the Appellant : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Azeemuddin, A.P.P.

     For the Informant       : Mr. Vikesh Kumar, Advocate


07/16.12.2021    Heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellant Mr. R.S.

Mazumdar; learned A.P.P. Mr. Azeemuddin and learned counsel for the informant Mr. Vikesh Kumar on the prayer for suspension of sentence made by the appellant through I.A. No. 3133 of 2021.

Sole appellant along with co-convicts, Md. Taiyab Ansari @ Viru, Wasim Ansari and Md. Mustaq Ansari stand convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C. The other convict Md. Amin has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C by the impugned judgment dated 18.12.2017 passed in S.T. No. 342 of 2012 by the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi and convict Md. Amin and all other convicts have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and a default sentence each under Section 302 r/w 120-B I.P.C. and 302/34 r/w Section 120B of I.P.C. respectively by the impugned order of sentence dated 23.12.2017.

Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that case of the present appellant stands on similar footing as that of co-convict Wasim Ansari and Mushtaq Ansari @ Md. Mushtaq Ansari @ Mushtaq, who have been enlarged on bail by this Court and co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.12.2021 and 18.08.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 277 of 2020 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 175 of 2018. It is submitted that confession of the accused Md. Taiyab Ansari @ Viru was recorded first in the point of time on 22nd November, 2011 at 06:45 a.m. The confession of this appellant was recorded at 09.45 a.m. on the same date on 22.11.2011. The recovery of motorcycle and a mobile phone is of the appellant It is submitted that the case of the prosecution at best is of last seen as would appear from the

statement of P.W.9 and P.W.11, who claimed to have seen the deceased going with the four accused persons on two bikes. P.W.9 has also stated that deceased was in jail in connection with a rape case. Seizure-list witnesses (P.Ws. 7 and 8) have stated that nothing was recovered in their presence. Another co-convict Md. Amin Ansari @ Md. Amin has also been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.12.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 450 of 2019. Appellant is in custody since 18.12.2017. Therefore, appellant, who is similarly placed as that of co-convicts may also be enlarged on bail.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. He submits that P.Ws. 9 and 11 have seen the deceased accompanying the present appellant and other three accused persons going on bike and on their confession the weapon of assault, two motorcycles and one cell phone were recovered. F.S.L report confirms human blood on the weapon of assault. Therefore, appellant may not be enlarged on bail.

We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the materials relied upon by them from the lower court record including the period of custody undergone by the appellant. It appears that the case of the prosecution is of last seen and there is no eye witness. It further appears that the confession in first point of time was made by co-convict, Md. Taiyab Ansari @ Viru at 6.45 am. on 22nd November, 2011, thereafter the confession of this appellant were recorded at 9:45 a.m. The dead body was recovered at 17:30 hours on 18th November, 2011 before confession were made as per the inquest report (Ext.-7). On consideration of the materials on record and on similar grounds two other co-convict namely Wasim Ansari and Mushtaq Ansari @ Md. Mushtaq Ansari @ Mushtaq have been enlarged on bail by this Bench and a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 277 of 2020 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 175 of 2018 respectively, therefore, we are inclined to grant the privilege of suspension of sentence to the appellant.

Accordingly, the appellant, named above, during the pendency of this appeal, shall be enlarged on bail 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 Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in connection with S.T. No. 342 of 2012 with the conditions that

appellant and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile number without permission of the learned Trial Court and that appellant as well as his bailors would also submit the Aadhar Card before the court below at the time of furnishing bail bonds.

I.A. No. 3133 of 2021 is disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

A.Mohanty