Ashique Mallick vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2246 Jhar

                                -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.1312 of 2021
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.66 of 2021

     Ashique Mallick                          ......      Appellant

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

     For the Appellant      : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
     For the State          : Mr. S. K. Sinha, A.P.P.
                             ---------
          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.

05/Dated: 07th July, 2021

I.A. No.1312 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 appellant, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 27.01.2021 and order of sentence dated 29.01.2021, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - II, Ghatshila, in Sessions Trial No.79 of 2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) on each count, in default thereof, to suffer simple imprisonment of two years.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the F.I.R was lodged against the unknown. Although this appellant was identified in Test Identification Parade, but the identification is doubtful, as per the deposition of P.W.-3. 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 has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that proper T.I.P was held which has been proved by P.W. - 11.

5. There is enough materials on record, which justify the conviction of the appellant. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for suspension of sentence of the appellant is, hereby, rejected.

6. However, the appellant is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after completion of half of the sentence.

7. I.A. No.1312 of 2021 stands rejected.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-