Kadir Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2193 Jhar

                                -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.186 of 2021
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.465 of 2020

     1.   Kadir Ansari
     2.   Maruk @ Maruf Ansari                ......       Appellants
                            Versus

     The State of Jharkhand                   .....   Respondent
                            ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

For the Appellants : Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Ankur Anand, Advocate For the State : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P For the Informant : Mr. P. Lala, Advocate Mr. A.P. Joshi, Advocate

---------

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

07/Dated: 05th July, 2021

I.A. No.186 of 2021

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 appellants, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.07.2020, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - III, Jamtara, in S.T. No.114 of 2014, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 323/34 of the I.P.C, two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 324/34 of the I.P.C., and three years and six months with fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 325/34 of the I.P.C with the default clause.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the maximum punishment has been awarded for three years and six months out of which the appellants

have remained in custody for one year. The dispute between the parties is with respect to right of way due to which an altercation took place and both the parties have sustained injuries. The allegation against these appellants are causing injury by using iron rod, stones and bricks. It has further been submitted that there is a case and counter case between the parties. On the above facts, prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail.

5. Perused the materials on record. It appears that the appellants are in custody for one year and the dispute between the parties is to right of way due to which sudden fight took place between the parties.

Considering the nature of allegation and dispute between the parties, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellants on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge - III, Jamtara, in connection with S. T. No.114 of 2014, subject to the condition that the appellants shall deposit Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) each, as ad-interim compensation in the court below, which shall be released in favour of the informant.

6. The appellants shall remain present before the Court, when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which their bail shall be cancelled.

7. I.A. No.186 of 2021 stands allowed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-