Binay Yadav @ Nirbhay Jee @ Karan ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2741 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                 Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.233 of 2022
                                 ----

Binay Yadav @ Nirbhay Jee @ Karan Jee @ Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

----

For the Appellant : Mr. Pradeep Kr. Prasad, Adv.

For the State                         : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
                                 ----
              th
03/Dated: 19 July, 2022

      I.A. No.4670 of 2022

1. This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for suspension of sentence and releases him on bail, during pendency of the instant appeal.

2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 25(1)A and 26 of the Arms Act and under Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.02.2022 by which the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 25(1)A of the Arms Act and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 26(2) of the Arms Act. In default thereof, further to undergo three months imprisonment each. The order has been passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Hazaribag in S.T. No.400 of 2018 arising out of Katkamdag P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2096 of 2018.

3. At the very outset, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the conviction is bad in law as the recovered arm does not come under the definition of prohibited arms. His punishment should have been at best under the 25(1-B)a of the Arms Act in which the maximum punishment is three years. The appellant has remained in custody for about four years.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State could not dispute the above factual position.

5. In view of above facts, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant and enlarge him on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Hazaribag in S.T. No.400 of 2018 arising out of Katkamdag P.S. Case No.86 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2096 of 2018, subject to the condition that the appellant will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

6. In the result, I.A. No.4670 of 2022 is, hereby, allowed.

7. The appellant shall remain present before the Court, when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail shall be cancelled.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Amar/-