Jharkhand High Court
Ramanand Ram @ Ramannand Ram vs The Union Of India Through C.B.I on 18 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.284 of 2019
------
Ramanand Ram @ Ramannand Ram .... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through C.B.I. .... .... .... Respondent
With
------
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.444 of 2019
------
Md. Ilyas Hussain @ Md. Illiyas Hussain
.... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation
.... .... .... Respondent
With
------
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.458 of 2019
------
Dhudheshwar Nath Singh @ Dudheshwar Nath Singh
.... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through CBI/ SPE/Ranchi
.... .... .... Respondent
With
------
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.469 of 2019
------
Md. Sahabuddin Baig .... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through C.B.I./ SPE, Ranchi
.... .... .... Respondent
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellants : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate
Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate
Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate
For the C.B.I. : Mr. Prashant Pallav, A.S.G.I.
------
Order No.26 Dated- 18/11/2022
I.A. No.7171 of 2022 in Cr.Appeal (SJ) No.469 of 2019
Heard the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that this
interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to suspend the
sentence and grant of ad interim bail during the pendency of the instant
appeal. It is next submitted that the self-same prayer made by the
applicant-appellant was rejected by this Court by a reasoned order dated
22.06.2021 passed in I.A. No.1691 of 2021 with I.A. No.2353 of 2021 with
I.A. No.8963 of 2019. The applicant-appellant thereafter approached the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Crl.) No.(s).7546-7548/2021 but
the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has been pleased to dismiss the same
vide order dated 20.10.2021. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for
the applicant-appellant that the applicant-appellant has filed the instant
appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
22.02.2019 passed by the learned Spl. Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi under the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 passed in R.C. No.02(A)/1997-R,
whereby the Applicant-Appellant has been convicted and sentenced to
undergo separate Rigorous Imprisonment for commission of offences
punishable under various penal provisions of law as follows:-
Name of the Offences Imprisonment Fine Default
Convict
Md. Section 13 (2) 5 years R.I. Rs. 10 lacs 6 Months S.I.
Sahabuddin r/w Section 13
Baig (1) (d) of the
P.C. Act
Md. Section 120B 2 years R.I. Rs. 10 lacs 6 Months S.I.
Sahabuddin r/w Sections
Baig 420, 407, 467,
468, 471 of the
I.P.C. r/w
Section 13 (2)
r/w Section 13
(1) (d) of the
P.C. Act
3. The brief facts of the case is that this case relates to bitumen scam
and the applicant-appellant was the employee of the State Government
and at the relevant time his substantial post was Commercial Tax Officer
in the Department of Commercial Taxes and he was posted for some time
as Private Secretary of the then Minister of Road Construction
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna being the co-convict -Md. Illiyas
Hussain @ Md. Illiyas and the Applicant-Appellant has been held guilty
along with the co-accused persons for having in criminal conspiracy with
the co-accused persons committed the misappropriation of 3045.200 MT of
bitumen amounting to Rs.1,52,26,000/-besides being a public servant
having committed the offence of misconduct.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is merit in this
appeal and the impugned judgment and conviction is not sustainable in
law. It is next submitted that the co-convict namely Ilyas Husain @ Md.
Illiyas has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
SLP (Crl.) No.5022 of 2020 vide order dated 24.11.2020 during the
pendency of Cr. App. (SJ) No.810 of 2020. Further, co-convict
Dhudheshwar Nath Singh @ Dudheshwar Nath Singh has also been
granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Crl.) No.5052
of 2021 vide order dated 23.09.2021 during the pendency of Cr. App. (SJ)
No.458 of 2019. It is further submitted that the applicant-appellant is an
old person aged about 69 years and he is suffering from various ailments
like arthritis and hyper tension. It is further submitted that the co-convict
Kedar Paswan filed SLP (Crl.) No.3648 of 2021 for suspension of sentence
and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to dismiss the same
vide order dated 13.09.2021 with a direction to decide the appeal
expeditiously. It is next submitted that the hearing of Criminal Appeal
were taken up by this Court on 29.09.2021 which continued till 26.04.2022
but the hearing of the appeal preferred by the appellant could not be
concluded and in the meanwhile the appellant has remained in custody
for about 4½ years. Hence, it is submitted that the sentence of the
appellant be suspended and ad interim bail be granted to the appellant
during the pendency of the appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. on the other hand vehemently
opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and submits that by a
reasoned order, the prayer for suspension of sentence has already been
rejected by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has also
rejected the S.L.P. filed against the said order dated 22.06.2021 passed by
this Court. The co-convicts who have been granted bail were prior to
dismissal of SLP (Crl.) NO.7546-7548 of 2021 dated 20.10.2021 so as such
no fresh ground is made out. It is next submitted by the learned counsel
for the C.B.I. that the co-convict namely Md. Ilyas Husain @ Md. Illiyas
filed I.A. No.4795 of 2020 before this Court in Cr. App. (SJ) No.444 of 2019
with a prayer for releasing him on provisional bail for three months and
the said interlocutory application is still pending and has not yet been
disposed of by this Court hence this Court has never rejected any
application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the co-
convict- Md. Ilyas Hussain @ Md. Illiyas who has been granted bail by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Cr. App (SJ) No.810 of 2020. It is next
submitted that there is every likelihood of the appellant-convict being
absconding as he also been convicted in another cases; the facts about
which conviction has been suppressed by the appellant in this
interlocutory application. Hence, it is submitted that the appellant ought
not be admitted on bail during the pendency of this appeal.
6. Perusal of the record reveals that from the impugned common
judgment, Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.457 of 2019, Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.284 of 2019,
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.444 of 2019, Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.458 of 2019, Cr. Appeal
(SJ) No.469 of 2019 have also arisen and the hearing of the appeals are
going on and by accommodating the lawyer of the appellants as per their
convenience, the appeals were heard as follows:
Date of Order Order Details
25-06-2020 Four weeks' time as prayed for by the
appellants was allowed.
13-05-2021 Appeals listed after three weeks
09-06-2021 Appeals to be listed after getting the
written notes of arguments and reply by
the respondents
22-06-2021 I.A. Nos.1691 of 2021 with I.A. No.2353 of
2021 with I.A. No.8963 of 2019 disposed of
and appeals listed for hearing in due
course or as and when mentioned by the
appellant on becoming ready for hearing of
the appeal on merit.
29-09-2021 Appeals to be listed for peremptory
hearing on 27.10.2021
01.11.2021 Upon the prayer of all the parties, appeal
to be listed on 16.11.2021 for further
hearing on the merits of the appeal.
16-11-2021 Heard the appeals in part and the appeals
to be listed on 18.11.2021
18-11-2021 On the prayer of all the learned senior
counsel and learned counsels for the
appellants, appeals to be listed on
22.11.2021.
22-11-2021 Heard Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned
counsel for the appellant in part and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
depositions of P.W.-1 to P.W.-15 and
appeals to be listed on 23.11.2021
23-11-2021 Heard Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.284 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
depositions of P.W.16 to paragraph no.157
of P.W.23 and appeals to be listed on
25.11.2021
25.11.2021 Heard Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.284 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
deposition of P.W.23 and appeals to be
listed on 29.11.2021
30.11.2021 Heard Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.284 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
depositions of P.W.36 to paragraph no.50
of P.W.38. and appeals to be listed on
02.12.2021.
02-12-2021 Heard Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.284 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
depositions of P.W.38 to P.W.45 and
appeals to be listed on 07.12.2021.
07-12-2021 Learned counsel for the appellant Mrs.
Jasvindar Mazumdar concluded the
argument in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.284 of
2019. Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh
commented as his argument on the merit
of Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.444 of 2019 and took
the Court through the deposition of P.W.-
23 from paragraph 1 to 118 and the appeals
to be listed on 09.12.2021.
03-02-2022 Mr. R. Venkataramani, learned senior
counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal
(S.J.) No.458 of 2019 and he concluded his
arguments and other counsels for the
appellants prayed for time and appeals to
be listed on 28.02.2022 for further hearing.
28-02-2022 Heard Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.444 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
depositions of P.W.22 to the examination in
chief of the P.W.38 and appeals to be listed
on 03.03.2022 for further hearing.
03-03-2022 Heard Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.444 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
file marked Ext. X/27 from page no.1 to 42
and appeals to be listed on 07.03.2022.
07-03-2022 Since, there was no time, hence, appeals to
be listed on 08.03.2022.
22-03-2022 Heard Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.444 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court through the
file marked Ext. X/27 from page no.71 to
144 and thereafter through paragraph
no.28 to paragraph no.93 of deposition of
P.W.38. and appeals to be listed on
24.03.2022.
24-03-2022 Heard Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, learned
counsel for the appellant in part in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No.444 of 2019 and the
learned counsel took the Court to the
depositions of P.Ws.43, 45 and P.W.23 as
well as Ext. F 1 which is the deposition of
P.W.23 in another case being R.C.
No.11(A)/1997-D and on the prayer of the
said counsel appeals to be listed on
26.04.2022
26-04-2022 On the prayer of the learned counsels for
the appellants as well and the learned
counsel for the C.B.I., appeals to be listed
on 15.06.2022
15-06-2022 A co-ordinate Bench of this Court recused
these appeals.
21-10-2022 Learned counsel for the C.B.I. prayed for
time in I.A. No.7171 of 2022 in Cr. Appeal
(SJ) No.469 of 2019 and I.A. to be listed
after two weeks.
7. After 26.04.2022 the roster of this Bench was changed and this
appeal was taken out from the Board of this Bench because of change in
roster and no provision was made in the roster for part heard matters to
be heard by this bench and as the Bench to which this appeal was allotted
as per the new roster recused, hence, vide order dated 15.06.2022, the
matter was referred to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and after that this
appeal has been assigned to this Court. The hearing of this appeal has
already resumed and it can be disposed of shortly provided the applicant-
appellant co-operates with the hearing of this appeal.
8. Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the chance of
absconding of the appellant if released on bail, this Court is of the
considered view that this is not a fit case where the sentence of the
appellant-applicant be suspended and he be admitted on bail during the
pendency of this appeal. Accordingly, this interlocutory application, being
without any merit, is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Cr. App. (SJ) No.284 of 2019 with Cr. App. (SJ) No.444 of 2019 with Cr.
App. (SJ) No.458 of 2019 with Cr. App. (SJ) No.469 of 2019
List these appeal on 25.11.2022 for hearing on the merits of the appeal.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Animesh/
