Jharkhand High Court
Murli Prasad Mahto @ Murli Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 September, 2021
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
I.A. No.2483 of 2021
In
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.191 of 2021
Murli Prasad Mahto @ Murli Mahto
@ Murat Mahto ...... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
---------
For the Appellant : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. P. K. Prasad, Advocate
---------
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.
04/Dated: 06th September, 2021
I.A. No.2483 of 2021
1. This interlocutory application has been filed under
Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for
suspension of sentence and grant of ad-interim bail, to the
appellant, during the pendency of the appeal.
2. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction dated 09.03.2021 and order of sentence dated
17.03.2021, passed by the court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge - VI, Hazaribag, in Sessions Trial No.308 of
2019, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the
offence under Sections 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 452 read
with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and awarded
maximum sentence of 5 years and fine of of Rs.10,000/- for
the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C with the default
clause.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
A.P.P, assisted by the learned counsel for the informant.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
appellant that the appellant is in custody since 09.03.2021
and he has been brought in this case in the proceeding under
Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The victim is gotia of this appellant
and due to a land dispute, he has been falsely implicated in
this case. It has further been submitted that there is only one
witness, who is the victim itself, who has supported the
allegation and there is chance of false implication. On the
above facts, prayer for suspension of sentence has been
made.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P, assisted by learned
counsel for the informant, has opposed the prayer for
suspension of sentence.
6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I
am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the
appellant on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, 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 - VI, Hazaribag, in
connection with Sessions Trial No.308 of 2019, subject to the
condition that the appellant will remain present before the
Court when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which
his bail shall be cancelled.
7. I.A. No.2483 of 2021 stands disposed off.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Chandan/-
