Sri Ram Birua @ Sriram Birua vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2039 Jhar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 384 of 2020
                                        ....

            Sri Ram Birua @ Sriram Birua                           ....    Appellant
                                        Versus
           The State of Jharkhand                                   .... Respondent
                                        ....
            CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

            For the Appellant              : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Adv.
            For the State                  : Mr. V.S.Sahay, APP
                                           ....

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.

05/24.06.2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Admit.

Issue notice.

Lower court records has already been received.

I.A. No.4635 of 2020 This application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code on behalf of the appellant, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, during pendency of the instant appeal.

The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Spl. (POCSO) Case No.18 of 2017, arising out of Manjhari P.S. Case No.13 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.181 of 2017 vide judgment dated 25.02.2020 and order of sentence dated 26.02.2020 by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for the offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year. The appellant has been further sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 506 of the IPC.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the maximum punishment awarded is three years and out of three years the appellant has already served half of the sentence. On that ground, prayer for bail has been made.

Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the appellant has served half of the sentence, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of this appellant, accordingly the appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail, 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-I-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Spl. (POCSO) Case No.18 of 2017, arising out of Manjhari P.S. Case No.13 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.181 of 2017, subject to the condition that the appellant will deposit the fine amount i.e. Rs.10,000/- as ad interim compensation in the court below before his release without prejudice to his defence and the same should be released in favour of the victim and further the appellant shall remain present before the Court as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail bond shall be cancelled.

However, the court below before issuing the release order will satisfy itself regarding the fact that the appellant has completed half of the sentence. If not, then no release order will be issued rather the matter will be reported to this Court.

I.A. No.4635 of 2020 stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/