Jharkhand High Court
Sevli Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 495 of 2022
....
1. Sevli Devi
2. Shyam Sao @ Shyam Saw
3. Krishna Sao @ Krishna Prasad Sao .... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
....
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Appellants : Mr. Atam Ram Choudhary, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Adv.
....
06/19.10.2022 I.A. No.9658 of 2022
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 appellants, during the pendency of the appeal.
The appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 07.05.2022 and 18.05.2022 respectively, passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge -VI -cum- Special Judge C.A.W, Hazaribag in S.T.
No.60 of 2019, arising out of Barhi P.S. Case No.144 of 2013, corresponding to
G.R. No.1749 of 2013, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections
323/ 304/ 337/ 338/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the maximum sentence
imposed upon the appellants is R.I. for five years for the offence under Sections
304/ 34 of the I.P.C along with fine and default clause.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that all the
appellants have been discharged for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C but
they have been finally convicted for the offence under Section 304 Part II of the
I.P.C. It has further been submitted that both the parties are gotias and they were in
litigating terms. The death was accidental and it has been used against the
appellants. It has been submitted that the doctor has not been examined and the
Investigating Officer has not find any bricks/ stone, which has been alleged to be
used as a weapon. The appellants were all along on bail. On above basis, prayer for
suspension of sentence has been made.
Learned A.P.P and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the
prayer for suspension of sentence. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
the informant that there was specific allegation of assault upon the husband of the
informant by bricks which has ultimately resulted in his death.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it
appears that single injury has been found on the head of the deceased which has
been said to be the cause of death after five days of the incident in the hospital.
Considering the above fact, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the
appellants on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on their furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge -VI -cum- Special
Judge C.A.W, Hazaribag in S.T. No.478 of 2013, subject to the condition that the
appellants will remain present before the Court when the appeal is taken up for
hearing, failing which their bail shall be cancelled.
I.A. No.9658 of 2022 stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Shahid/
