Md. Salim vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1987 Jhar

                                   -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    I.A. No.850 of 2022
                            In
             Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.62 of 2021

     Md. Salim                                   ......         Appellant
                               Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                      .....    Respondent
                               ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

For the Appellant : Mr. M. K. Laik, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. K. Srivastava, 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.

---------

               th
07/Dated: 13        May, 2022
I.A. No.850 of 2022

1. The present 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, during the pendency of the appeal.

2. Earlier, the application for suspension of sentence of the appellant has been dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to renew the prayer after six months vide order dated 26.07.2021, passed in I.A. No.3193 of 2021.

3. The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 25.01.2021 and order of sentence dated 28.01.2021, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge - I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in S.T. No.148 of 2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 380 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and the maximum sentence imposed upon him is rigorous imprisonment for six years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- with a default clause for the offence under Section 380 of the I.P.C.

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has remained in custody for more than half of the sentence awarded to him, i.e., more than three years. Further, the similarly situated co-convict has already been enlarged on bail. On the above facts, prayer for suspension of the appellant has been made.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.

6. Considering the fact that the appellant has remained in custody for more than half of the sentence, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant 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, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No.148 of 2017, 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.

7. I.A. No.850 of 2022 stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Chandan/-