Jharkhand High Court
Vikash Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 990 of 2022
Vikash Kumar Sharma ..... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
With
Cr. Revision No. 1027 of 2022
Md. Ishtekhar & Anr. ..... ...... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Anr. .... ....Opp. Parties
With
Cr. Revision No. 1127 of 2022
Roushan Kumar ..... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Anr. .... ....Opp. Parties
With
Cr. Revision No. 1158 of 2022
Rohit Raj @ Buti ..... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
With
Cr. Revision No. 1442 of 2022
Bablu Hembrom ..... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
-------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awanish Ranjan Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Rohit Ranjan, Advocate
Mr. Saurabh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P.
For the Informant-Bank : Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharati, Advocate
--------
rd
Order No.06 /Dated: 23 August, 2023
I.A. No.6045 of 2023 in Cr. Revision No.990 of 2022
1. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed for suspension
of sentence and also to release the petitioner on bail during pendency of this
Criminal Revision.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by way of this
Criminal Revision, the order dated 30.06.2022 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-II, Hazaribag in Criminal Appeal No.44 of 2021
along with Cr. Appeal No.46 of 2021 and Criminal Appeal No.48 of 2021,
whereby the appeals were dismissed affirming the conviction passed by the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag on 30.11.2021 in G.R. Case
No.571 of 2020 corresponding to T.R. No.404 of 2021 for the offence
registered under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(C) of
the I.T. Act modifying the sentence passed by the learned trial Court that both
the sentences shall run concurrently.
3. It is also further submitted that it was Raushan Kumar, who had
prepared fake website and Md. Ishtekhar was the owner of the bank accounts
and there is no role of the appellant in commission of the alleged offence. His
complicity is shown on the basis that Debit Card and Passbook of his name,
which was recovered from the co-accused Parmeshwar Sao.
4. The learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the
informant vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner and contended that the impugned judgment of conviction and
the sentence passed by the learned trial Court, which was affirmed by the
learned appellate Court is based on the proper appreciation of the evidence on
record.
5. As per the prosecution version, the informant Sujeet Kumar Singh,
Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Badi Bazar, Hazaribag had given the
written information with these allegations that the Bank Officers had come to
know about the cyber crime committed by the bearer of bank account No.
6635000100047154, namely, Md. Ishtekhar alleging therein that a forged
website www.pmcarerelieffund.com has been made and an appeal has been
made for donation in the same P.M. Cares Relief Fund. The abovementioned
account number was in the name of P.M. Cares. In fact, in the account of Md.
Ishtekhar till date of lodging FIR, total amount of 34,87,701.26/- had been
deposited through the donation and the complete amount has been transferred
to the another accounts. The Mobile Number, Aadhar Number, PAN Card
Number, Date of Birth of the accused Md. Ishtekhar were also given in the
written information and it is alleged that the same account has been opened
through online mode on 13.01.2020 and since institution of the case, the
aforesaid amount was deposited.
6. It is evident that initially the FIR was lodged against Md. Ishtekhar.
During investigation the name of the appellant has transpired. The trial Court
and the appellate Court basing the conviction of the petitioner only relied upon
the fact that Debit Card and Bank Passbook were recovered from the house of
the co-accused and there is no other complicity of the petitioner in commission
of the alleged offence.
7. Keeping in view, the sentence inflicted and finding recorded by the
Court below, it is fit case for suspension of sentence. Accordingly, I.A. No.
6045 of 2023 is allowed.
8. The sentence inflicted by the learned Court below shall remain
suspended during pendency of this Criminal Appeal.
9. In consequence thereof, the petitioner, namely, Vikash Kumar Sharma
is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousands) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Hazaribag in Criminal
Appeal No.44 of 2021 along with Cr. Appeal No.46 of 2021 and Criminal
Appeal No.48 of 2021.
Cr. Revision No. 990 of 2022
10. Admit.
11. Lower Court Records has already been received.
12. List this Criminal Revision for hearing along with Cr. Revision
Nos.1027 of 2022, 1127 of 2022, 1158 of 2022 & 1442 of 2022 as per their
seriatim.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Madhav/-
