Jharkhand High Court
Vimal Sabar @ Vishwanath Sabar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 644 of 2022
------
Vimal Sabar @ Vishwanath Sabar ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
--------
For the Appellant : Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Mahua Palit, Addl.P.P.
--------
th
Order No. 06: Dated: 08 February, 2023
Heard, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and
learned Addl. P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has
submitted that one I.A. has been filed on behalf of the appellant to
enlarge the appellant on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that this Court
has already admitted this appeal, which has been preferred against the
judgment of conviction dated 29.05.2020 and order of sentence dated
30.05.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Ghatsila, East
Singhbhum in S.T. No.152 of 2019 (arising out of Gurabanda P.S. Case
No.23 of 2018, consequent G.R. No.29 of 2019, under Section 302 of IPC)
whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under
Section 304(II) of IPC and under Section 201 of IPC.
It has further pointed out that on behalf of the appellant that this
appellant had been alleged to have killed Charan Sabar, husband of the
informant (P.W.-5) and after killing him the deceased was alleged to have
been hanged on a tree by dhoti .
It has further been pointed out that appellant is innocent and he is
not involved in the commission of the offence as evident from the FIR
itself where a doubt arose about one Sukra Sabar and whose name has
been taken by the informant (P.W-5) and not about the involvement of
this appellant at all in the commission of the offence because of the
landed property dispute.
It has further been pointed out that the relevant and material
witnesses, P.W.-1, P.W.-2, P.W.-3 and P.W.-4, who are the co-villagers
have been declared hostile by the prosecution and P.W.-5, who was the
informant of the present case had stated only about suspicion against the
appellant and also she was not the eye witness of the occurrence.
It has further been pointed out that the post-mortem report of the
deceased was also vague and not clear with respect to the cause of death
as to whether the deceased succumbed to the injuries which are alleged
to have been assaulted by the appellant or by hanging due to asphyxia by
a ligature material (dhoti) from the tree as both the opinion has been
given by the Doctor examined on behalf of the prosecution.
It has further been pointed out that the appellant had been in jail
for a period of long time about more than four years and thus, more than
half of the sentence has already been served by the appellant in the jail
and therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P. appearing on behalf of
the State opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant.
Having taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of
this case and after being satisfied with the forceful submission advanced
on behalf of the appellant, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the appellant
on bail.
Accordingly, the appellant, namely, Vimal Sabar @ Vishwanath
Sabar is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousands only) with two sureties of the
like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-II, Ghatsila, East Singhbhum in S.T. No.152 of 2019 (arising out of
Gurabanda P.S. Case No.23 of 2018 consequent G.R. No.29 of 2019).
The original LCR has been received.
Let this appeal be posted under the heading "For Hearing" in its
seriatim.
I.A. No.11715 of 2022 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.S./-
