Santosh Sharma @ Pappu Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 5137 Jhar

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 541 of 2022
                                ------

1. Santosh Sharma @ Pappu Sharma

2. Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Chhatri @ Ravi Kumar Chhatri ... ... Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent

--------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

--------

For the Appellants : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. V.S. Sahay, Addl.P.P.

--------

Order No. 05: Dated: 19 December, 2022 th

Learned counsels for the parties are present.

I.A. No. 6665 of 2022 Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellants with a prayer to enlarge the appellants on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 15.03.2022 and sentence dated 21.03.2022 passed in Sessions Trial No. 04 of 2019 by District & Additional Sessions Judge-III, Koderma, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under section 25 (1-A)/35 and 26/35 of the Arms Act and they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine further R.I. of 1 year u/s 25 (1-A)/35 of the Arms Act and further RI for 3 years and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine further R.I. for 6 months under section 26/35 of Arms act.

It has been pointed out that this appeal is already admitted and both the appellants are in jail custody since 03.08.2018 about 4 years in jail custody. It has further been pointed out that no seizure list witnesses have supported the alleged seizure for the fire arms which creates doubt over the seizure of the fire arms on the basis of statement given by the seizure list witnesses and it has also been pointed out that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possessions of the appellants and the learned trial court has committed error in appreciating the evidence and passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. It has been also been pointed out that the co-appellant Raju Singh whose case also stands on similar footing have been enlarged on bail .

On the other hand, leanred Addl.P.P. for the State opposed the prayed for bail.

Having taken into consideration the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants under the facts and circumstances of this case, it is found fair and just to grant the privilege of bail to the appellants and accordingly the appellants, above named, are directed to be enlarged on bail, during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-III, Koderma in connection with Sessions Trial No. 04/2019 (CNR No. JHKD01000092- 2019).

Accordingly, I.A. No. 6665 of 2022 stands allowed. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 541 of 2022

Office is directed to call for the original lower court record in this appeal from the concerned court and let this case be listed after receipt of the same for hearing along with the Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 341 of 2022.

(Navneet Kumar, J.) MM