Munna Kole vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2497 Jhar

                                -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.3115 of 2021
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.377 of 2019

     Munna Kole                               ......      Appellant
                            Versus

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

     For the Appellant      : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate
     For the State          : Ms. Ruby Pandey, 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: 23rd July, 2021 I.A. No.3115 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 28.01.2019 and order of sentence dated 05.02.2019, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - II, Deoghar, in Sessions Trial No.241 of 2009, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand), in default thereof, to suffer simple imprisonment of one year.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that earlier the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant has been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.07.2019, passed in I.A. No.3628 of 2019, giving liberty that if so advised, the appellant may renew his prayer after two years. It has been submitted that the appellant has remained in custody for about 3½ years. It has further been submitted that medical evidence does not corroborate the allegation. On the above facts, prayer for suspension of sentence has been made.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case and considering the observation of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, 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 - II, Deoghar, in connection with S.T. No.124 of 2009, subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit the fine amount of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) in the court below, which shall be released in favour of the victim.

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

7. I.A. No.3115 of 2021 stands allowed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-