Pandu Hembrom vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 4351 Jhar

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1985 of 2017

              Pandu Hembrom                                  ---    ---      Appellant
                                              Versus
              The State of Jharkhand                ---           ---   Respondent
                                                ---

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

---

For the Appellant: Mr. Thankachan P.V, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Azeemuddin, A. P.P

---

08 / 23.11.2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the prayer for condonation of delay of 42 days in preferring the instant Memo of Appeal made through I.A. No. 2695/2021.

2. On consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and grounds urged, delay is condoned. I.A. stands disposed of.

3. The sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned judgment dated 17.07.2017 passed in Sessions Trial No. 70/2010 (S1) by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa and has been sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and default sentence by the impugned order of sentence dated 20.07.2017.

4. Admit.

5. Call for the lower court records in connection with Sessions Trial No. 70/2010 (S1) from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.

6. The prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A. No. 8422/2017 shall be considered after receipt of the lower court records.

7. It appears from reading of para-1 of the impugned judgment that a supplementary case vide S.T. Case No. 70/2010 (S) was opened for trial of the present appellant since he had become absconder. It further appears from the annexed chart that two Criminal Appeals i.e. Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 522/2019 and Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 869/2019 have been preferred by other convicts Talku Hembrom and Gopi Hembrom respectively. In that case, learned counsel for the State would inquire as to whether all the remaining accused persons have been tried and whether convicted or acquitted as it appears from para-2 that apart from this appellant, there were four other accused persons. An affidavit to that effect be filed within four weeks.

8. Place the other Criminal Appeals also when the matter is taken up.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J) Ranjeet/