Jharkhand High Court
Krishna Karmali @ Krisnna Kramale vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.34 of 2022
----
Krishna Karmali @ Krisnna Kramale .... .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----
For the Appellant : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P.
----
th
05/Dated: 29 June, 2022
I.A. No.789 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 386,
353, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27(1) of the Arms
Act and under Section 17(1) of the C.L.A. Act vide judgment of conviction
dated 29.09.2021 and order of sentence dated 04.10.2021 by which the
appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven
years and fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 386 of the I.P.C.
and in default thereof, further to undergo two months simple imprisonment;
rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years for the offence under Section
353 of the I.P.C.; rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of
Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. and in default
thereof, further to undergo two months simple imprisonment; rigorous
imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under
Section 27 of the Arms Act and in default thereof, to undergo simple
imprisonment for two months and rigorous imprisonment for six months for
the offence under Section 17(1) of the C.L.A. Act, passed by the learned
AJC-XV-FTC (CAW), Ranchi in S.T. No.87 of 2019 arising out of Dhurwa
P.S. Case No.205 of 2018.
3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the
applicant is in custody since 02.09.2018 that is more than half of the
maximum punishment awarded. No injury has been sustained by any person
and further there is no material to connect the appellant, so far as section 386
IPC is concerned.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
5. Considering the above facts and the period of custody, 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 AJC-XV-
FTC (CAW), Ranchi in S.T. No.87 of 2019, subject to the condition that the
appellant will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar 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.789 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/-
