Guddu Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2320 Jhar

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 140 of 2020
                                         ....

1. Guddu Khan

2. Pallu Dom @ Ibrar Ansari

3. Karu Chauhan

4. Md. Guljar .... Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent ....

             CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

                For the Appellants              : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Adv.
                For the State                   : Mrs. Lily Sahay, APP
                                                ....

11/28.06.2022             I.A. No.4223 of 2020
                          I.A. No.341 of 2022

The instant interlocutory applications have been filed on behalf of the appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of ad interim bail, during pendency of the instant appeal.

This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.01.2020 and 29.01.2020 respectively passed by learned Dist. & Addl. Sessions Judge-XIV, Dhanbad in S.T. No.102 of 2018, arising out of Dhanbad G.R.P.S. Case No.158 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.301 of 2017, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 353/325/34 of IPC read with Sections 150/153 of Indian Railway Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence under Section 325 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, further sentenced to undergo S.I. for one month. The appellants further sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 353 of IPC with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine further sentenced to undergo S.I. for one month. The appellants further sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for the offence under Section 153 of the Indian Railways Act.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the maximum punishment has been awarded under Section 325 of IPC. The injury has been evidenced only on the basis of oral evidence of P.W.-2 but no X-Ray Report has been brought on record. It has been further submitted that all the appellants have remained in custody for more than half of the maximum punishment i.e. five years. The appellant Nos.1, 3 and 4 have remained in custody for more than four years while the appellant No.2, namely, Pallu Dom @ Ibrar Ansari has remained in custody for more than three years. On above fact, prayer for suspension of sentence has been made.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the period of custody, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellants on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Dist. & Addl. Sessions Judge-XIV, Dhanbad in S.T. No.102 of 2018, arising out of Dhanbad G.R.P.S. Case No.158 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.301 of 2017, subject to the condition that the appellants will submit self attested copy of their Aadhar Card and also give their mobile number before the learned court below, which they will not change during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

I.A. No.4223 of 2020 and I.A. No.341 of 2022 stand disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/