Jharkhand High Court
Deepak Rana vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1041 of 2019
Deepak Rana --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
---
For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Lalan Kr. Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P.
---
09/16.09.2021 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and learned
A.P.P. on the renewed prayer for suspension of sentence of this appellant
made through I.A. No.3878 of 2022.
2. The sole appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable
under Section 304B of the I.P.C. vide impugned judgment dated 07.08.2019
passed in S.T. Case No.172/2017 by the court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VII, Hazaribag and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for life vide impugned order of sentence dated 09.08.2019.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that earlier the prayer
for suspension of sentence of this appellant was dismissed as not pressed at
that stage vide order dated 29th September 2021. Now the appellant who is the
husband of the deceased, has undergone 5 and ½ years of sentence since he
was taken in custody on 17th March 2017. It is submitted that the informant is
the father P.W.6 who has been declared hostile at the request of the
prosecution. The incidence is of 27th December 2016 but the F.I.R. was
registered on 7th January 2017. It has come in the statement of the P.W.1 son
of the informant that the appellant and her mother-in-law has taken her to the
hospital after she sustained burn injuries. The informant in his statement has
also stated that no complaint or criminal case was lodged in connection with
the alleged demand of dowry and torture. He has further stated in his
deposition that the case was instituted at the behest of the villagers at
paragraph-13 of the cross-examination. Apart from that, P.W.5, 7, 8 and 9
have turned hostile while other prosecution witnesses no.3 and 4, who are
villagers, are hearsay witnesses. Nothing incriminating has come out from
their depositions either. It is further submitted that the mother of the deceased
P.W. 2 at para-20 of her deposition has stated that on the birth of her grand-
daughter (Natini) on 8th July 2016 she had asked for deposit of Rs.5 Lakhs in
her name, otherwise they would institute case against them. He submitted that
the deceased did not die immediately but much after her treatment. She was
also taken to RIMS on 3rd January 2017 from Bokaro General Hospital where
she was initially admitted. She died of Septicemia due to burn injury
exothermic burn. As such, the appellant having served more than 5 and ½
years of custody, may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.
4. Learned A.P.P. Mr. Anup Pawan Topno appears for the State and
has opposed the prayer.
5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the materials on record relied upon by them from the
lower court records. It appears that the informant father has turned hostile
during trial. He has also stated that the case was instituted at the instigation of
the villagers. The mother of the deceased P.W.2 has also stated at para-20 of
her deposition that she had asked for deposit of Rs.5 Lakhs in the name of her
grand-daughter born out of the deceased, failing which a case would be
instituted against them. The deceased died after about 11 days of the incidence
on 6th January 2017 due to septicemia. The appellant has remained in custody
for about 5 and ½ years.
6. Taking into account all these facts and circumstances above, we
are inclined to grant the privilege of suspension of sentence to the appellant
during pendency of the appeal. Appellant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VII, Hazaribag in connection with S.T. Case No.172/2017 subject to
condition that the appellant as well as his bailors shall not change their
addresses and mobile numbers, if any, without prior permission of the learned
trial court. I.A. No. 3878 of 2022 stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Shamim/
