Govind Sao vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 3736 Jhar

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                     I.A. No. 1754 of 2020
                                             In
                          Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 758 of 2016

                                         With
                                I.A. No. 4143 of 2020
                                          In
                      Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 1153 of 2016
                                         --------

Govind Sao ....... Appellant (Cr.A. 758/2016). Raju Prasad Sao ....... Appellant (Cr.A. 1153/2016).

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand. ....... Respondent (in both cases).

------

     CORAM          : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
                    : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                      Through: Video Conferencing.

                                             ------

           For the Appellants         : M/s Arwind Kumar and Amit Kr. Choubey, Advocates
           For the State               : M/s Nehala Sharmin and Ashok Kumar, A.P.Ps.

                                I.A. Nos. 1754 of 2020 and 4143 of 2020

14/30.9.2021        Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the
           State.

By way of filing these interlocutory applications, appellants have renewed their prayer to suspend the sentence and release them on bail, during pendency of these appeals.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are in custody for more than five years against the sentence of 10 years, thus they may be released on bail. Counsels for the appellants submit that law has been changed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, as after seizure, charge-sheet cannot be filed by the police, so the conviction is bad.

Learned A.P.Ps. Oppose the prayer for bail of the appellants. We have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the record. We find that similar prayer for the appellants has been rejected. From the motorcycle of appellant (in Cr. Appeal No. 758 of 2016) 05 kg opium was recovered, which was kept in five plastic bags. The appellant ( in Cr. Appeal No. 1153 of 2016) was apprehended from the spot and two persons managed to flee. Further the argument made by the appellants that their conviction is bad cannot be appreciated at this stage, where the appellants have prayed for bail. This submission can be considered at the final hearing of these appeals.

Considering the material, which has been recovered and the quantity i.e. 05 kg. of opium, we are not inclined to release the appellants on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellants, named above, is hereby, rejected.

Accordingly, these interlocutory applications are dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Anu-CP-3. (SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.)