Nirmal Maharaj vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2390 Jhar

                                 -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.579 of 2021
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.509 of 2020

     Nirmal Maharaj                            ......     Appellant
                             Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                    .....   Respondent
                             ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

     For the Appellant       : Mr. B. M. Tripathy, Sr. Advocate
                               Mr. N. K. Jaiswal, Advocate
     For the State           : Mr. S. K. Shukla, 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.

07/Dated: 16th July, 2021 I.A. No.579 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 appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 17.02.2020 and order of sentence dated 19.02.2020, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- 1st -cum- Special Judge-cum-FTC, Bokaro, in Special POCSO Case No.59 of 2018, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 354A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, for the offence under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, rigorous imprisonment of two years with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 12 of the POCSO Act, and further, imprisonment of one month and six months for the offence under Sections 341 and 323 of the I.P.C, respectively with the default clause.

3. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has remained in custody for about three years out of the maximum sentence of five years. On the ground of the period of custody of the appellant, the prayer for suspension of sentence has been made.

4. Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody of the appellant, 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- 1st -cum- Special Judge-cum-FTC, Bokaro, in connection with Special POCSO Case No.59 of 2018, subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit the fine amount of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) in the court below, which shall be released in favour of the victim.

6. However, the court below, before issuing the release order, shall satisfy itself regarding the fact that the appellant has remained in custody for half of the sentence of the maximum sentence, if not, the release order shall not be issued and the matter shall be reported to this Court.

7. I.A. No.579 of 2021 stands allowed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-