Jharkhand High Court
Hannan Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 617 of 2018
Hannan Mian --- --- 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. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Adv.
03/25.11.2021 Heard Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant learned A.P.P.
and learned counsel for the informant on the prayer for suspension of sentence
of the appellant made through I.A. No.5452 of 2021.
This appellant along with 7 others stand convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 147/148, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149,
326/149, 307/149 and 302/149 of the I.P.C. vide impugned judgment of
conviction dated 05.04.2018 passed in S.T. No. 128 of 2013 by the learned
court of Principal Sessions Judge, Jamtara and all the convicts have been
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months each for the offence under Section 147
of the I.P.C., R.I. for 1 year each for the offence under Section 148 of the
I.P.C., R.I. for 6 months each for the offence under Section 323/149 of the
I.P.C., R.I. for 2 years each for the offence under Section 324/149 of the
I.P.C., R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and default sentence for
the offence under Section 325/149 of the I.P.C., R.I. for 5 years with a fine of
Rs.5,000/- each and default sentence for the offence under Section 326/149 of
the I.P.C., R.I. for 10 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and default
sentence for the offence under Section 307/149 of the I.P.C. and life
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000/- each and default sentence for the
offence under Section 302/149 of the I.P.C. vide impugned order of sentence
dated 12.04.2018. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that out of the
13 persons facing trial, 5 have been acquitted and 8 including the present
appellant have been convicted but with the aid of Section 149 of the I.P.C. It
is submitted that there was a preexisting land dispute between the informant
party and the accused. It is submitted that the allegations of assault are not
only upon this appellant but also upon other accused Rahman Mian as well as
other accused persons. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since
August 2013 i.e. about 8 years and 3 months. He is aged 64 years by now.
Learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that P.W.21 has in fact stated
contrary to the other witnesses on the point of assault on the deceased. As per
P.W.21 the other convict Rahman Mian had assaulted the deceased.
Therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.
Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant has
opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the assault by Farsa on the deceased
Kallu @ Sarfuddin Mian is specifically upon this appellant as per the F.I.R.
lodged by the prosecution witness no.22. This specific allegation has been
corroborated by the injured wife of the deceased P.W.17, P.W.12 another
injured victim and P.Ws.19 and 20 who are brother and son of the other
deceased Ramzan Mian. It is submitted that P.W. 26 the Doctor has adduced
the post-mortem report of the deceased (Ext.9) which shows several ante-
mortem injuries including by such sharp cutting weapon Farsa. It is further
submitted that several accused persons forming an unlawful assembly
assaulted the informant parties in which two persons died and the others were
injured. Therefore, 8 accused persons have been held guilty with the aid of
Section 149 of the I.P.C. In reply to the submission relating to the statement of
P.W.21, it is submitted that P.W.21 is the wife of this appellant. Therefore, the
appellant may not be enlarged on bail.
We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the materials on record relied upon by them
including the period of custody undergone by the appellant.
On consideration of the rival submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties and in the light of the materials on record as also the period of
custody i.e. 8 years and 3 months undergone by the appellant who has been
convicted with the aid of Section 149 of the I.P.C. along with 7 other accused
persons and also taking into account his age, we are inclined to grant the
privilege of suspension of sentence to the appellant during pendency of the
appeal. Appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each,
to the satisfaction of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Jamtara in connection
with S.T. No. 128 of 2013 with the condition that the appellant as well as his
bailors shall not change their addresses and mobile numbers, if any, without
prior permission of the learned trial court and shall submit Aadhar Cards at
the time of his release. I.A. No.5452/2021 stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J)
Shamim/
