Jharkhand High Court
Ashok Choudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 396 of 2017
......
Ashok Choudhary --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo
For the Appellant : M/s A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate,
Anurag Kashyap, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Niki Sinha, A.P.P.
---
09/11.11.2022 Heard Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant Mr. A.K.
Kashyap on the renewed prayer for suspension of sentence of the appellant
made through I.A. No.9767 of 2022.
Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 302 read with Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code vide impugned
judgment of conviction dated 10.02.2017 passed in Sessions Trial
No.378/2012 by the learned court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bokaro and
has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 of the
I.P.C. with a fine of Rs.20,000/- and default sentence and no separate sentence
has been awarded under Section 324 of the I.P.C. vide impugned order of
sentence dated 13.02.2017.
Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that P.W.6
brother of the deceased wife of the appellant is the informant. It is submitted
that P.W.7 a seven years old minor son of the deceased has stated that on the
date of occurrence the father came at around 12:00 noon and went upstairs
where mother was alone. He was playing downstairs. Thereafter he has seen
the deceased at the time of funeral. P.W.7 the minor son has however not
made any statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and he was tutored to
say that on the fateful day the father had come at 12:00 noon. However, his
statement was recorded in the case diary under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. It is
submitted that P.W.1 to 4 have been declared hostile. The Doctor P.W.5
examined the deceased on 23rd September 2012 at 4:20 P.M. Learned Senior
Counsel further submits that however considering the custody of more than 10
years undergone by the appellant since 24th September 2012, the appellant
may be enlarged on bail also in view of the guidelines laid down by the Apex
Court in the recent judgment.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer.
On consideration of the rival submissions of learned counsel for
the parties, taking into account the materials relied upon from the record and
that the appellant has undergone custody of more than 10 years by now, we
are inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail by suspending the sentence during
pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bokaro in connection with Sessions Trial
No.378/2012, subject to the conditions that the one of the bailors should be
the close relative of the appellant and the other should be the deponent of this
interlocutory application; appellant as well as his bailors shall not change their
residential addresses and mobile numbers, if any, without prior permission of
the learned trial court and shall submit Aadhar Cards at the time of his release.
I.A. No.9767/2022 stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Shamim/
