Jharkhand High Court
Imteyaz Khan @ Imitiyaz Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No.1386 of 2019
---------
Imteyaz Khan @ Imitiyaz Khan ... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Soheb Alam ... Opposite Parties
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-------
For the Petitioners : Mr. L.C.N. Sahahdeo, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P.
---------
Order No.07 Dated 28th February, 2023
I.A No.1960 of 2023
The present Criminal Revision has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 21.09.2019 passed in
Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 2019 by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VIII, Dhanbad by which the said Criminal Appeal has been
dismissed and thereby, affirming the judgment of conviction and order
of sentence dated 21.05.2019 passed by Ms. Shruti Soren, Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with G. R. No. 2047 of
2018, arising out of Bank More P. S. Case No. 121 of 2018, whereby the
petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 386/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I for a period of
three (03) years and pay fine of Rs.300/- and in default of payment of
fine, he has further been sentenced to undergo S.I. for one month..
2. The present Interlocutory Application being I.A No.1960 of 2023
has been filed on behalf of the petitioner in Criminal Revision No.1386
of 2019 for grant of bail, during the pendency of this Criminal Revision
Application.
3. Heard L.C.N. Sahahdeo, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.
Anup Pawan Topno, learned counsel for the State.
4. The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this
Court in Cr. Revision No.1386 of 2019 vide order dated 25.04.2022,
with the observation 'at this stage'.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
there is delay of more than two months in lodging the F.IR. It is
submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and the name
of the petitioner has been taken for the first time, during his evidence
by P.W.2 namely, Soheb Alam. It is further submitted that co-
accused person namely, Rajjan Khan has already been granted bail
by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.04.2020
in Criminal Revision No.1444 of 2019. It is further submitted that
the petitioner has surrendered in the learned Court below on
05.01.2022 and since then, he is in judicial custody and during the
trial, he was in custody for some period and hence, he may be
enlarged on bail.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed
the prayer for bail and has submitted that though the petitioner is not
named in the F.I.R., but he is also involved in the instant case and he
had called the Informant and other accused persons in his house,
where the demand of Rangdari was made and hence, the prayer for
bail may be rejected.
7. Perused the L.C.R, and I.A No.1960 of 2023 and considered
the submission on behalf of the parties.
8. It transpires that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier
rejected by this Court in Cr. Revision No.1386 of 2019 vide order dated
25.04.2022 with the observation 'at this stage'.
9. It transpires that occurrence of demanding Rangdari took place
on 07.02.2018, but the FIR was lodged on 01.05.2018.
10. It further transpires that the petitioner is named by the P.W.2
namely, Soheb Alam for calling the Informant and other accused
persons in his house on 27.04.2018 but this fact has not been stated
and incorporated in the F.I.R.
11. It appears that co-accused person namely, Rajjan Khan has
already been granted bail by the Court Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 16.04.2020 in Criminal Revision No.1444 of
2019.
12. Considering the aforesaid facts and in the circumstances of this
case and grant of bail to the other co-accused person as mentioned
above, during pendency of this Criminal Revision, the petitioner
namely, Imteyaz Khan @ Imitiyaz Khan, is directed to be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ms.
Shruti Soren, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad or her Successor
Court in connection with G. R. No. 2047 of 2018, arising out of Bank
More P. S. Case No. 121 of 2018, subject to the condition that one of
the bailors should be own relative of the petitioner, with further
condition that the petitioner shall file an Undertaking that he will not
get indulged himself under the same crime in future again, failing
which, the prosecution may take step for cancellation of his bail.
13. Accordingly, I.A No.1960 of 2023 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
Criminal Revision No.1386 of 2019
14. This Criminal Revision No.1386 of 2019 is admitted.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead the
Informant as Opposite Party No.2, during course of the day.
16. Issue notice upon the newly added Opposite Party No.2 by
registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process, for
which requisites etc., must be filed within a period of two weeks
after Holi Holidays, failing which, this Criminal Revision
Application shall stand rejected without further reference to the
Bench.
Accordingly, put up this case in the month of January, 2024
under the heading "For Hearing".
Let a copy of this order be also sent to Senior Superintendent
of Police, Dhanbad.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Raja/
