Shri Aditya Narain Chourasia vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2596 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Cr. Appeal(S.J.) No.205 of 1998
                                 ------

Shri Aditya Narain Chourasia .... .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Bihar, through Central Bureau of Investigation .... .... .... Respondent

------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

      For the Appellant          : Mr. Akash Deep Advocate
      For the C.B.I.             : Mr. Rohit Sinha, Adv.
                                 ------
     Order No.08 Dated- 28.07.2021
      I.A. No.2496 of 2021
            Heard the parties through video conferencing.

This I.A. No.2496 of 2021 has been filed with prayer to grant bail to the appellant during the pendency of the appeal. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the appellant was released on bail during the pendency of the appeal the Hon'ble Patna High Court and after the creation of the High Court of Jharkhand, the appeal was transferred to this Court. It is further submitted that the appeal was listed on 28.05.2020 but no one turned up on behalf of the appellant and the Registry was directed to intimate separately to all the four advocates appearing for the appellant-Shri Aditya Narain Chaurasia by issuing notice to them in writing intimating them that in this appeal no one turned up on behalf of the appellant, when the appeal was called out for hearing and they must appear in the court on the next day of listing of the appeal, failing which, the bail granted to the appellant be cancelled. It is next submitted that the appeal was again listed on 25.01.2021, but again no one turned up on behalf of the appellant, when the matter was called out for hearing. Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, learned counsel who earlier filed Power (vakalatnama)on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant has taken back the brief from him and he is no more the counsel for the appellant in this appeal and refused to assist the Court for hearing the appeal.

On 25.01.2021 learned counsel for C.B.I. submitted that it was apparent that the appellant was avoiding to appear in this Court to prevent the hearing of this appeal to be taken up, so that, in effect, his conviction will be set at naught, hence it is submitted that the bail granted to the appellant be cancelled.

Considering the conduct of the appellant, the bail granted to the appellant-Shri Aditya Narain Chaurasia after his conviction by the trial court was cancelled on 25.01.2021. Even then the appellant did not surrender before the trial court and ultimately he was arrested and taken into custody on 07.04.2021.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is an old and ailing person of 75 years old while the conviction is for one year R.I. under Section 165A I.P.C. r/w 120B I.P.C. it is next submitted that, the appellant was all along on bail during the trial and the judgment was pronounced in the year 1998. It is further submitted that section 165A I.P.C. stood omitted in the year 1988 itself by virtue of enactment of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is next submitted that non-appearance of the appellant before this Court on previous occasions were not deliberate on his part but today the appellant is not ready for hearing of the appeal on merits and the appellant praying for time to get ready for hearing of the appeal on merits. Hence, it is submitted that the appellant be admitted to bail.

Learned counsel for C.B.I. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the appellant and submits that the bail granted to an appellant during pendency of an appeal is not unfettered and entails with it the liability to co-operate the court with the hearing of the appeal but keeping in view of the conduct of the appellant that the appellant took back the brief from the earlier counsel engaged by him and did not engage another lawyer, shows that his intention is clear that by this way, he can set at naught his conviction and it is next submitted that with much difficulty, he could be arrested by C.B.I. and there is every chance of the appellant absconding, if released on bail again during the pendency of the appeal keeping in view that there is sufficient material against him and his conviction by the trial court is in accordance with law hence there is no merit in this appeal. It is further submitted that the learned counsel for the C.B.I. that the respondent CBI is ready for hearing the appeal on merit and if the learned counsel for the appellant is ready for hearing of the appeal which can be disposed of in any working day but as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant today, even today the appellant is not ready for hearing of the appeal on merits. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts that this appeal can be disposed of any day when the learned counsel for the appellant is ready for hearing of the appeal and from the conduct of appellant, as it is crystal clear that he does not want to co-operate in hearing of the appeal and today also, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not ready for hearing of the appeal as also considering the chance of his absconding if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the appellant be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

I.A. No.2496 of 2021 is disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.205 of 1998 Learned counsel for the appellant prays for time to get ready for hearing on merits of the appeal.

Prayer for time is allowed.

List this appeal after one week.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pappu/