Jharkhand High Court
Shankar Nahak vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 787 of 2014
Shankar Nahak --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra
Through: Video Conferencing
---
For the Appellant: Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State: Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P.
---
08 / 29.10.2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Nilesh Kumar and learned
A.P.P Mr. Saket Kumar on the prayer for suspension of sentence of this
appellant made through I.A. No. 4700/2021.
2. This appellant along with Raj Kumar Nahak @ Raju stood convicted for
the offence punishable under section 366-A and 376-D of the Indian Penal Code
by the impugned judgment dated 23.09.2014 passed in Sessions Trial No.
488/2013 / T.R. No. 443/2013 by the Court of learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-III-cum-F.T.C (CAW), Ranchi and both the convicts have been
sentenced to undergo R.I for ten years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and
default sentence under section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and further
sentenced to undergo R.I for twenty years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and
default sentence under section 376-D of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned
order of sentence dated 29.09.2014.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that earlier, prayer for
suspension of sentence of this appellant was rejected on merits vide order dated
25.02.2015. Prayer for suspension of sentence has been renewed primarily on
the ground that the appellant is in custody since 31.01.2013 i.e. about eight
years and nine months till date. It is submitted that the offence was committed
on 04.01.2013 and amended provision of section 376-D was brought into force
with effect from 03.02.2013 by virtue of the Act 13 of 2013. At the relevant
point of time, punishment for gang rape under section 376 (2) (g) was rigorous
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may
be for life and shall also be liable to fine. It is submitted that the victim was
found to be aged between 16 to 17 years, as per the doctor, whereas during
deposition as PW-6 on 25.03.2014, victim has stated her age to be twenty years.
It is submitted that the victim stayed with the co-convict Raju Nahak for a
period of about one month, as it appears from the statement made at Para-6 of
her deposition when she says that she was recovered from Talchar by her father
and police. It is submitted that the present appellant may be enlarged on bail by
suspending his sentence.
4 Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer. He submits that earlier, prayer
for suspension of sentence of this appellant was rejected on consideration of
materials from the lower court records. No fresh grounds are made out for his
release.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and taken note of the materials relied upon by them from the lower court
records including the period of custody undergone by the appellant from
31.01.2013 i.e. about eight years and nine months till date. Having regard to the
facts and circumstances noted above including the period of custody undergone
by the appellant, we are inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail by suspending
his sentence during pendency of this appeal. Accordingly, Appellant Shankar
Nahak shall be released on bail, during pendency of this appeal, on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-
III-cum-F.T.C (CAW), Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 488/2013 / T.R. No.
443/2013 with the condition that the appellant and his bailors shall not change
their address or mobile nos. without permission of the learned Trial Court and
Appellant and his bailors shall also furnish their Aadhar Card before the learned
Trial Court at the time of his release. I.A. No. 4700 /2021 stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Ratnaker Bhengra, J)
Ranjeet/
