Jharkhand High Court
Mantu Hansda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 July, 2023
1 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.357 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.357 of 2023
Mantu Hansda ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellant : Ms. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, APP
-----
2/13.07.2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and
learned APP appearing on behalf of State.
I.A. No. 4449 of 2023
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted
that the I.A. No. 4449 of 2023 has been filed on behalf of the appellant
with a prayer to condone the delay of 44 days in filing of this appeal,
which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated
16.01.2023 and order of sentence dated 19.01.2023 passed by learned
Session Judge, Dumka in S.T. No. 85/2020, arising out of Raneshwar
P.S. Case No. 03/2020 (G.R. Case No. 689/2020), registered U/S 302
I.P.C. whereby the appellant has been found guilty for the offence
punishable under section 304 part II of I.P.C. and further sentenced to
undergo R.I. for Seven years.
3. It is submitted that the appellant is in jail and he had been in jail
throughout the trial of this case and therefore he could not take
appropriate steps because he is a poor man and he could not file the
present appeal within the stipulated period of time and when this
appellant was provided the legal aid defence counsel from the
Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA), Ranchi and then
this appeal has been filed and therefore the delay has been caused in
filing of this appeal, which is bona fide in nature and three is no willful
default on the part of the appellant in filing the appeal delayed and
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.357 of 2023
therefore it is prayed that let the delay of 44 days in filing the appeal
be condoned, failing which the appellant will suffer irreparable loss.
4. Having taken into consideration the aforesaid submission
advanced on behalf of the appellant and the reasons shown in the IA.
No.4449 of 2023, the delay of 44 days in filing this appeal is hereby
condoned and the I.A. No. 4449 of 2023 is allowed.
IA No. 4448 of 2023
5. The Learned legal aid defence counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant submitted that IA No. 4448 of 2023 has been filed on
behalf of the appellant with a prayer to enlarge the appellant on bail
during pending of the appeal which has been preferred against the
judgment of conviction dated 16.01.2023 and order of sentence dated
19.01.2023 passed by learned Session Judge, Dumka in S.T. No.
85/2020.
6. It is further submitted that this appellant is all along in custody
during the trial since 20/01/2020 and the maximum sentence awarded
by the learned court below in this case is 7 years and as such the
appellant has served a substantive period of sentence, i.e. about 3 &
1/2 years and as such about half of the sentence have already been
served by the appellant.
It has further been pointed out that this appellant is a Ghar Jamai
(son-in-law) of the informant and because of a trivial scuffle between
the parties, the alleged occurrence has taken place in the heat of
passion and there was neither any intention nor any knowledge for
committing the offence and therefore utmost it is a case under Section
326 of the IPC and not under section 304 Part II of the IPC and as such
he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
State opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant, but
did not controvert the fact that the appellant has served a substantive
period of sentence, i.e. about 3 & 1/2 years and the maximum sentence
3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.357 of 2023
awarded by the learned court below is 7 years and it is also not
controverted that the appellant is the son-in-law of the informant.
8. Having heard the parties, perused the record of this case.
9. In view of the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the
appellant, the appellant above named is directed to be enlarged on
bail during pending of this appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousands only) with one surety of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court of learned Session
Judge, Dumka in connection with S.T. No. 85/2020, arising out of
Raneshwar P.S. Case No. 03/2020 (G.R. Case No. 689/2020).
10. Accordingly the IA No. 4448 of 2023 is allowed.
11. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned court below
through FAX / email for its compliance.
12. The concerned presiding Judge is also directed to ensure the
legal aid from the secretary of the concerned District Services
Authority to facilitate the appellant in furnishing of bail bond of the
appellant, if needed.
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.357 of 2023
13. This appeal is admitted for hearing.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.Kumar
