Bishnu Asur @ Bishun Asur vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1587 Jhar

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                     I.A. No. 926 of 2022
                                               In
                            Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 495 of 2016
                                              ...

Bishnu Asur @ Bishun Asur...... Appellant(s).

Versus The State of Jharkhand. ....... Respondent.

------

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

------

               For the Appellant(s)       : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
               For the State              : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P.

                                    I.A. No. 926 of 2022

5/20.04.2022            Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the
               State.

By way of filing this interlocutory application, the appellant has renewed his prayer to suspend the sentence and release him on bail, during pendency of this appeal.

Earlier interlocutory application (I.A. No. 3483 of 2016) praying therein to release the appellant on bail after suspending the sentence, was withdrawn with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after October, 2017.

Counsel for the appellant submits that there is no material against the appellant, save and except that he is mere a villager of the village, in the vicinity of which the explosion has taken place. The appellant is also not named in the FIR.

There is allegation that the Maoist had exploded land mines, which resulted in death of eleven police personnel.

From para 28 of the impugned judgment, we find that the trial court has found material against the appellant that he along with others was involved in the occurrence. Further in para -18 of the impugned judgment, the Court held that this appellant and others were seen at the place of occurrence prior to the bomb blast or were seen taking part during the encounter with the police party. The accused including this appellant were also identified by the witnesses present in the dock.

Considering the aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to release the appellant on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant, named above, is hereby, rejected.

Accordingly, this interlocutory application is dismissed. However, the appellant is at liberty to file an application for early hearing of this appeal.

Office is directed to prepare paper book.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.) Anu/-CP3