Jharkhand High Court
Binod Uraon @ Binod Kumar Uraon @ ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 429 of 2020
....
Binod Uraon @ Binod Kumar Uraon @ Binod Oraon
...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opp. Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, APP
......
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.
.....
I.A. No. 622 of 2022
07/13.04.2022 The present Interlocutory Application has been filed by the
petitioner for bail during pendency of the present criminal revision.
2. Heard Mr. B. K. Dubey, the learned counsel for the
petitioner an Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, the learned A.P.P. on behalf
of the State.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner was convicted by the
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra vide judgment dated 10.08.2017 in
connection with Tandwa P. S. Case No. 24 of 2012 corresponding to
G. R. No. 327 of 2012 of the offences under Section 279, 337 and
304(A) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for a period
of four months for the offence under Section 279 of the Indian Penal
Code and R.I. for four months for the offence under Section 337 of
the Indian Penal Code and R. I. for one and half year for the offence
under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code and all the sentences
were directed to run concurrently. However, the learned Appellate
court vide judgment dated 24.01.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal
No. 34 of 2017 has set aside the conviction under Section 304(A) of
the Indian Penal Code, but upheld the conviction for the offences
under Sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code for which the
petitioner was sentenced to undergo R. I. for four months each. It is
submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2021 and has
completed almost his sentence and as such, he may be enlarged on
bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has
opposed the bail.
5. Perused the Lower Court records and considered the
submissions of both the sides.
6. It would appear from the order passed by the learned Court
below that conviction under Sections 279 and 337 has been upheld
by the Appellate Court for which petitioner was sentenced R. I. for a
period of four months each. It appears that the petitioner has
remained in custody almost for about four months.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
also considering the age of the petitioner, during pendency of this
Criminal Revision, the petitioner, Binod Uraon @ Binod Kumar
Uraon @ Binod Oraon is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) to
the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra vide
judgment dated 10.08.2017 in connection with Tandwa P. S. Case
No. 24 of 2012 corresponding to G. R. No. 327 of 2012.
8. Accordingly, I.A. No. 622 of 2022 stands allowed and
disposed of.
Cr. Revision No. 429 of 2020
Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner
has submitted that he does not want to press this Criminal Revision
Application as this petitioner has already in custody for almost four
months, which was awarded by the learned Court below for the
offences under Sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code and as
such, appropriate order may be passed.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has
submitted that the petitioner is in custody for about four months and
as such, appropriate order may be passed.
3. Perused the Lower Court Records and the impugned
judgments.
4. It transpires that the petitioner was convicted by the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra vide judgment dated 10.08.2017 in
connection with Tandwa P. S. Case No. 24 of 2012 corresponding to
G. R. No. 327 of 2012 of the offences under Section 279, 337 and
304(A) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for four
months for the offence under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code
and R.I. for four months for the under Section 337 of the Indian
Penal Code and R. I. for one and half year for the offence under
Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code. However, the learned
Appellate court vide judgment dated 24.01.2020 passed in Criminal
Appeal No. 34 of 2017 has set aside the conviction under Section
304(A) of the Indian Penal Code, but upheld the conviction for the
offences under Sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code for which
the petitioner was sentenced to undergo R. I. for four months each. It
also appears that the petitioner has now completed almost four
months in custody.
5. In that view of the matter, the judgment dated 24.01.2020
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2017 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chatra for the offences for the
offences under Sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code is
modified to the extent that the sentence of the petitioner is reduced to
the period of sentence already undergone.
6. Thus, this Criminal Revision Application is disposed of
with the above modification in the sentence and the observation
made above.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
