Jharkhand High Court
Ajay Kumar Sao vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 22 of 2022
Ajay Kumar Sao
@ Ajay Kumar Gupta ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Nalin Sharma ...... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P.
.....
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties
had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
.....
Order No. 05/ Dated: 13.05.2022
Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. I.A. No. 2623 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for condoning the delay of 202 days' in filing of the present
Criminal Revision before this Court.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner was unaware of the legal repercussion which has
been mentioned in para 4 to 9 of this I.A. and as such he could not file
the Criminal Revision after passing of the judgment by the learned
Appellate Court below. But, after consulting his son, the petitioner
has filed this Criminal Revision after delay of 202 days . It is
submitted that the petitioner is aged about 50 years old. It is also
submitted that the petitioner could not understand the effect of passing
of the judgment as such the delay of 202 days may be condoned.
4. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the
State has opposed the prayer for bail.
5. Heard both the sides and considering the averments
-2
made in paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of this I.A. No. 2623 of 2022, I am
inclined to condone the delay of the 202 days in filing the present
criminal revision.
6. Thus I.A. No. 2623 of 2022 is allowed and stands disposed of
Cr. Rev. No. 22 of 2022
7. I.A. No. 2625 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail to the petitioner.
8. Pursuant to the order dated 11.04.2022 notice was issued to the
O.P. no. 2 but O.P. no. 2 has not appeared till date .
9. The present Criminal Revision No. 22 of 2022 has been filed
on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 28.05.2019
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 2017 by the learned District &
Additional Sessions Judge, VIII, Giridih affirming the order dated
06.11.2017 passed in Complaint Case No. 1399 of 2014
corresponding T.R. No. 1232 of 2017 by which Mr. Ravi Choudhary,
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has convicted the petitioner
under section 138 of the N.I. Act. and sentenced him to undergo S.I.
for a period of one (01) year and to pay fine of Rs. 3,00,000/-
(Rupees Three Lakh only) and in default of payment of fine he has
further been sentenced to undergo S.I. for three (03) months.
All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
judgments and order of conviction passed by the learned Courts below
are not sustainable in the eyes of law and the learned Court below has
not appreciated evidence of the witnesses properly. It is submitted that
the petitioner is ready to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- ( one lakh) without
prejudice to his case in the name of O.P. No. 2 and hence, the
petitioner may be released on bail.
11. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State
-3
has opposed the prayer for bail.
12.Having gone through the records of this case and In view
of undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner to
deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- in the name of O.P. No. 2 by Demand Draft at
the time of furnishing bail bonds, the petitioner Ajay Kumar Sao @
Ajay Kumar Gupta is directed to to be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only ) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Mr. Ravi
Choudhary, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih or his
successor Court , subject to the condition that one of the bailers must
be own relative of the petitioner and subject filing the Demand Draft
of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the name of O.P. no. 2 at the time of furnishing
bail bond.
Thus, I.A. No. 2623 of 2022 stands disposed of.
Put up this case after appearance of the O.P. No. 2
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Bibha/
