Mansur Alam @ Mohd. Mansur Alam vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 877 Jhar

                                 -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.122 of 2022
                           In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.525 of 2021

     1.    Mansur Alam @ Mohd. Mansur Alam
     2.    Mahfuj Alam @ Mahfuz Alam
           @ Mohd. Mahfuz Alam
     3.    Ismail Ansari @ Mohd. Ismail
           @ Mohd Ismail Mian           ......            Appellants
                             Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                   .....   Respondent
                             ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

     For the Appellants      : Md. Faruque Ansari, Advocate
     For the State           : Ms. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P
     For the Informant       : Mr. Naiyer Eqbal, Advocate
                             ---------
               th
04/Dated: 07        March, 2022

I.A. No.122 of 2022

1. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and grant of ad-interim bail, to the appellant No.03 namely, Ismail Ansari @ Mohd. Ismail @ Mohd Ismail Mian, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 01.12.2021 and order of sentence dated 03.12.2021, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Latehar, in S.T. No.57 of 2016, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 307/34, 324/34, 323 and 341/34, and maximum sentence of five years along with fine of Rs.2,000/- each have been imposed upon the appellants for the offence under Sections 307/ 34 of the I.P.C.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that as per the allegation there was sudden free fight between two groups for the construction of staircase in a Mosque. The injury reported is simple in nature and at best it is a case under Section 308 of the I.P.C. It has further been submitted that the appellants have remained in custody for more than a year.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. Considering the facts of the present case, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant No.03 on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Latehar, in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2016, subject to the condition that the appellant will remain present before the Court when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which his bail shall be cancelled.

6. I.A. No.122 of 2022 stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-