Jharkhand High Court
Guddu Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 149 of 2022
....
1. Guddu Sahu
2. Ashok Sahu ...... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Kalawati Devi ...... Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the petitioner no. 1 : Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, Advocate
For the petitioner no. 2 : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P.
For the O. P. No. 2 : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karn, Advocate.
.......
I.A. No. 1848 of 2022
06/16.12.2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner no. 1 is directed to
incorporate the provision of law in the 1st page in I. A. No. 1848 of
2022 in course of the day.
2. I.A. No. 1848 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu for exempting him from surrender
before the learned Court below under Rule 159 of the High Court
of Jharkhand Rules.
3. The present Criminal Revision No. 149 of 2022 has been
filed on behalf of both the petitioners challenging the judgment
dated 14.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No. 275 of 2018 by
which the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal and
affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
29.08.2018 passed by Sri Vishal Gaurav, Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Class, Ranchi in connection with Chutia P. S. Case No. 175 of
2010 corresponding to G. R. No. 4613 of 2010 [T.R. No. 253 of
2018] by which the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu has been
convicted for the offences under Sections 341/325/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of
two (2) years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- for the offence under
Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to
undergo for a period of 15 days for the offence under Section 341
of the Indian Penal Code.
All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu
and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the
opposite party no. 2.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner no.
1-Guddu Sahu that the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu may be
exempted from surrendering in the learned Court below on the
ground that he is suffering from High Blood Pressure and Diabities
and Abdomen Disease. It is submitted that prescription of Doctors
has been enclosed in the supplementary affidavit filed on
24.11.2022 and as such, the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu may be
exempted from surrender in the learned Court below.
6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.
7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also
opposed the prayer and has submitted that these diseases are
common diseases and as such, prayer for exemption from
surrendering in the learned Court below may be rejected.
8. Perused the records of this case and supplementary
affidavit and considered the submission of learned counsel for
both the sides.
9. The Medical Prescriptions filed on behalf of the petitioner
no. 1-Guddu Sahu suggest that the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu
has got Blood Pressure and Diabities and Abdomen Disease.
10. This is a case of giving electric shock to one old widow
lady i.e. the opposite party no. 2 while the petitioner no. 1-Guddu
Sahu is happens to be the Gotia.
10. In view of the above, I am not inclined to exempt the
petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu from surrendering in the learned
Court below. Hence, his prayer for exemption from surrendering in
the learned Court below is rejected
11. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1848 of 2022 is rejected.
12. The petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu is directed to surrender
in the learned Court below within three weeks from today, failing
which, learned Court below will take effective steps for
apprehension of the petitioner no. 1-Guddu Sahu and will submit
reported before this Court on or before 23.01.2023.
I.A. No. 10329 of 2022
13. I.A. No. 10329 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner no. 2-Ashok Sahu for suspension of sentence and for
grant of bail during pendency of the present Criminal Revision
Application.
14. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 and learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2.
15. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner no.2- Ashok Sahu that the judgments and order passed
by the learned Court below are not sustainable in the eye of law. It
is submitted that there is delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. as
the occurrence took place on 13.10.2010, however, F.I.R. was
lodged on 19.10.2010. It is submitted that the main allegation of
assault is against the co-accused Lalu Sahu and there is general
and omnibus allegation against the petitioner no.2- Ashok Sahu for
assaulting the opposite party no. 2. It is submitted that the P.W.-9,
Dr. S. N. Yadav and P.W.-10, Dr. V. K. Srivastava have not
supported that as to how the opposite part no. 2 fell down. It is
submitted that P.W.-9, Dr. S. N. Yadav, who has treated the
opposite party no. 2, has stated that date of injury is not mentioned
in the injury report. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody
since 17.10.2022 and as such, he may be enlarged on bail.
16. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has
opposed the bail.
17. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed
the bail and has submitted that the petitioner along with other
accused persons had brutally assaulted the informant-opposite
party no. 2 due to which she became unconscious and then she was
given electric shock by the accused persons. It is submitted that
grievous injury was found on the shoulder of opposite party no. 2.
It is submitted that there is previous dispute between the parties.
The accused persons had threatened the opposite party no. 2 to
withdraw all the cases instituted against them by her.
18. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, has submitted
that the persons, who had given electric shock, have been
acquitted by the learned Court below. P.W.-9, Dr. S. N. Yadav has
not stated that as to who had sent the injured for her treatment to
his Hospital.
19. Perused the records of this Case and considered the
submissions of learned counsel for the both the sides.
20. It transpires that the petitioner no. 2 and the opposite party
no. 2 are own Gotia and there is previous dispute between the
parties. It transpires that the petitioner no. 2-Ashok Sahu is in
custody since 17.10.2022.
21. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
also considering the period of custody, during pendency of this
Criminal Revision Application, the petitioner no. 2-Ashok Sahu
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 Vishal Gaurav, Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi or his Successor Court in
connection with Chutia P. S. Case No. 175 of 2010
corresponding to G. R. No. 4613 of 2010 [T.R. No. 253 of
2018], subject to the condition that one of the bailor must be
own relative of the petitioner no. 2-Ashok Sahu and further the
petitioner no. 2-Ashok Sahu will remain careful in future and
shall not disturb the possession of the opposite party no. 2 with
respect to property in question failing which, she will be at
liberty to take steps in accordance with law.
22. Accordingly, I.A. No. 10329 of 2022 is allowed and
stands disposed of.
Cr. Rev. No. 149 of 2022
23. Put up this case on 23.01.2023 awaiting report of the
learned Court below.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
