Sandir Hassa @ Etwa Hassa vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3236 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 129 of 2023

Sandir Hassa @ Etwa Hassa                                              ... Appellant
                                       -Versus-
The State of Jharkhand                      ...                         ... Opposite Party

      CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

            For the Appellant :- Mr. Anil Kumar Ganjhu, Advocate;
                                 Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate
            For the State     :- Ms. Mohua Palit, APP
                                    ...

03/29.08.2023: IA (Cr.)No. 5179 of 2023 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the State on the interlocutory application filed by the appellant for suspension of sentence during the pendency of this criminal appeal.

This criminal appeal was directed against the judgment of conviction dated 17.02.2023 and the order of sentence dated 21.02.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khunti, in Sessions Trial No. 57 of 2021, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted under sections 25(1-B)a/ 26(1)/ 35 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 4 years RI and fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under section 25(1-B) a of the Arms Act and further sentenced to undergo 4 years RI and fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable under section 26(1) of the Arms Act. In default, further sentenced to undergo 1 year SI for each fine.

The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned trial Court has not taken into consideration that out of 8 prosecution witnesses, all are either police witnesses or official witnesses. The learned trial Court has also not taken into consideration that both seizure list witnesses are police constables and members of raiding party though seizure was made from the thickly populated area which itself creates doubt over the whole prosecution story. The learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant was arrested from the village but no independent witness has come forward to support the case of the prosecution and that there was no mark of identification on the seized materials. The occurrence was of 15.09.2020 whereas the seized articles were not sent before the Sargent Major after some delay and no cogent explanation has been given for such delay. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2020 but inadvertently in para-17 of this interlocutory application it has wrongly been mentioned as 17.02.2020. Therefore, the appellant is in custody for almost 3 years and the sentence imposed was 4 years. Therefore, his prayer for suspension of sentence, during pendency of this criminal appeal, may be considered.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed this interlocutory application for suspension of sentence, during the pendency of this criminal appeal.

Having gone through the records of the case, considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, also considering the period of custody already spent by the appellant and in the facts and circumstances, present petitioner, named above, is ordered to be released on bail, during pendency of this criminal appeal, on executing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Khunti, in Sessions Trial No. 57 of 2021.

Accordingly, IA (Cr.)No. 5179 of 2023 stands disposed of.

S.B.                                                    (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)