Basudeo Nayak vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4925 Jhar

                                   -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.2642 of 2020
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.214 of 2020

     Basudeo Nayak
     @ Basudeo Sao                               ......       Appellant
                              Versus
     1.   The State of Jharkhand
     2.   Jasanti Besra                          .....    Respondent
                              ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

For the Appellant : Mr. Sachin Mahato, Advocate For the State : A.P.P.

For the Resp. No.02 : Mr. Kamdeo Pandey, Advocate

---------

07/Dated: 20th December, 2021 I.A. No.2642 of 2020

1. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and grant of ad-interim bail, to the appellant, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 03.06.2019 and order of sentence dated 04.06.2019, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - I -cum- Special Judge SC/ ST Act, Hazaribag, in S.T. Case No.266 of 2009, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 323, 324, 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of maximum seven years along with fine and the default clause.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has remained in custody for more than 2½ years while the maximum punishment is of seven years. It has further been submitted that there was altercation between the parties and the necessary ingredients of Section 307 of I.P.C is not made out rather at best it is the case of Section 308 of the I.P.C. Further, the offence under Section 326 of the I.P.C is also not made out and at best the case under Section 335 of the I.P.C is made out. On the above fact, prayer for suspension of sentence has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P., assisted by learned counsel for the respondent No.02 have opposed the prayer for suspension of the sentence.

5. Considering the period of custody and the fact that co- convict has already been enlarged on bail, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge - I -cum- Special Judge SC/ ST Act, Hazaribag, in S.T. Case No.266 of 2009, subject to the condition that the appellant will remain present before the Court when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail shall be cancelled.

6. I.A. No.2642 of 2020 stands disposed off.

Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.214 of 2020

1. Admit.

2. Issue notice.

3. The lower court record has already been received in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.870 of 2019.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-