Jharkhand High Court
Sattar Ansari Son Of Mahmuddin ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 1003 of 2003
-----
Sattar Ansari son of Mahmuddin Ansari, resident of village Dumri, PS
Mandar, District Ranchi ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
Through- Video Conferencing
-----
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shreshtha, Spl.PP
Mr. Md. Hatim, APP
-----
12/Dated: 24/09/2021
IA No. 5037 of 2021
This Interlocutory Application has been filed for grant of bail of the
appellant during pendency of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1003 of 2003 which has been
filed against the judgment of conviction dated 05.05.2003 and the order of
sentence dated 07.05.2003 passed in ST No. 586 of 2000/ST No.50 of 2001
arising out of Mandar PS Case No. 31 of 1999, corresponding to GR No. 975 of
1999.
Learned counsel for the appellant has stated that PW-4, PW-5, PW-7,
PW-8,PW-9, PW-12 and PW-13 are the witnesses of the seizure list but all of
them have been declared hostile by the prosecution. He has further stated that the
appellant has been granted bail on 05.08.2003 and on 04.09.2018 his bail bond
was cancelled and, accordingly, non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against
the appellant. He has further submitted that the appellant had gone outside of the
State for earning his livelihood and after publication in newspaper he had
surrendered in the learned Court below on 03.06.2019 in ST No. 774 of 2005.
The appellant was remanded on 19.06.2019 in ST No. 586 of 2002 but the correct
ST No. is 586 of 2000 in which appellant was convicted. Learned counsel for the
appellant further submits that the appellant was in custody since 29.08.1999 to
05.05.2003 (three years eight months) and after conviction since 05.05.2003 to
05.08.2003 (three months six days) and after cancellation of bail-bond from
19.06.2019 and therefore, the appellant may be granted bail during pendency of
the appeal.
Mrs. Priya Shreshtha, the learned Spl.PP has opposed the prayer
made in the Interlocutory Application and submits that the case is ripe for
hearing and it may be listed for hearing, however, she further submits that it is a
case of misuse of privilege of bail and, therefore, this application may not be
allowed at this stage.
Having heard both sides and having gone through the records of the
case, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail, during
pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. Twenty Thousand (Rupees
Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner (Fast Track) Ranchi in connection
with ST No. 586 of 2000/ST No. 50 of 2001 arising out of Mandar PS Case
No. 31 of 1999 corresponding to GR No. 975 of 1999 subject to the condition
that the appellant will report to the concerned police station last Saturday at the
end of every month between 10 am to 12 noon. The learned Court below is
directed to keep a track of the observance of the order of this Court.
IA No. 5037 of 2021 is allowed and disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below.
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 1003 of 2003
Post this matter along with Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.764 of 2003 before an
appropriate Bench under the heading "For Hearing".
Let name of Mrs. Priya Shreshtha, the learned Spl.PP be reflected in
the cause list.
( Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
Nibha/Madhav/-
