Jharkhand High Court
Ibrar Ahmad @ Abrar Ahmed vs The State Of Jharkhand on 18 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No. 638 of 2022
....
Ibrar Ahmad @ Abrar Ahmed ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ......Opp. Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanat Kumar Jha, A.P.P.
......
I. A. No. 6656 of 2022
09/18.08.2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The instant I.A. No. 6656 of 2022 has been filed under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 26 days
in filing the instant Criminal Revision No. 638 of 2022.
3. It has been submitted that the learned counsel for the
appellant that there is delay of 26 days in filing Criminal Revision
No. 638 of 2022. It is submitted that the petitioner was out of
station for his livelihood and as such, he had no knowledge about
the impugned judgment in time and as soon as he came to his
knowledge, he came back and appeared before the Police Officer
and thereafter the petitioner arranged a pairvikar to look after his
case and due to which, the Criminal Revision Application has not
been filed within time and as such, delay of 26 days in preferring
the instant Criminal Revision Application may be condoned.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the limitation
petition.
5. Considering the averments made at para-5,6,7,8, 9 and 10
of the instant Interlocutory application and taking lenient view, the
delay of 26 days in preferring the Criminal Revision No. 638 of
2022 is, hereby, condoned.
6. I.A. No. 6656 of 2022 stands allowed and disposed of.
I.A. No. 7075 of 2022
7. The Cr. Revision No. 638 of 2022 has been filed on behalf
of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 25.11.2021
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2017 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-III, Lohardaga whereby the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-III, Lohardaga has dismissed the
Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2017 filed on behalf of the petitioner
by affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 25.11.2017 passed by Sri Raj Kumar Mishra, Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with G. R. No. 321 of 2013
corresponding to T. R. No. 164 of 2017 arising out of Lohardaga
P. S. Case No. 90 of 2013 by which the petitioner has been
convicted for the offence under Section 25(1-B) a/ 26(1)/35 of the
Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of
three (3) years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 25(1-
B) a/35 of the Arms Act and under Section 26(1)/35 of the Arms
Act respectively and in default of payment of fine, he has further
been sentenced to undergo S. I. for a period of three(3) months
each and all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
8. I. A. No. 7075 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail during pendency of this Criminal
Revision Application.
9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
10. It is submitted that the judgment and order passed by the
learned Court below are not sustainable in the eye of law. It has
been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
although one pistol was recovered from the possession of other co-
accused namely Md. Jawed @ Ladan, however, so far as this
petitioner is concerned, only two live cartridges of 8 MM and
8 MMKF were recovered from the possession of this petitioner. It
is submitted that the police has not made seizure list in the
presence of any independent witness. It is submitted that the
petitioner is in custody since 07.06.2022 and earlier during trial
also, he was in custody for some period and as such, he may be
enlarged on bail.
11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has
opposed the bail and has submitted that the petitioner along with
other co-accused Md. Jawed @ Ladan had been apprehended with
one pistol with two live cartridges of 8 MM and 8 MMKF and as
such, prayer for bail of the petitioner is fit to be rejected.
12. Perused the impugned judgment and considered the
submission of both the parties.
13. It transpires from the impugned judgment passed by the
learned Court below that the police had apprehended Md. Jawed
@ Ladan and this petitioner and on search, one country made
pistol was recovered from the co-convict, Md. Jawed @ Ladan and
two live cartridges were recovered from the possession of this
petitioner.
14. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and
considering the fact that only two live cartridges were recovered
from the possession of this petitioner, during pendency of this
Criminal Revision Application, the petitioner, Ibrar Ahmad @
Abrar Ahmed is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Raj
Kumar Mishra, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga or his
Successor Court in connection with G. R. No. 321 of 2013
corresponding to T. R. No. 164 of 2017 arising out of Lohardaga
P. S. Case No. 90 of 2013, subject to the condition that one of the
bailor must be own relative of the petitioner and the petitioner
shall remain present at the time of final hearing of the present
Criminal Revision Application before this Court.
15. Accordingly, I.A. No. 7075 of 2022 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
Cr. Revision No. 638 of 2022
16. Put up this case along with Criminal Revision No. 613 of
2022 on 05.09.2022.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
