Jharkhand High Court
Mantosh Poddar @ Mantosh Kr. ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 441 of 2021
Mantosh Poddar @ Mantosh Kr. Poddar --- --- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Agrawal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwary, A.P.P.
I.A. No. 8451of 2022
06/13.07.2023 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.P.P. on
behalf of the State.
2. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated
26.08.2021 and order of sentence dated 31.08.2021 passed in Cyber
Crime Case No. 26 of 2020 with Cyber Crime Case No. 47 of 2020
arising out of Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 4 of 2020 by the court of
learned Special Judge (Cyber Crime), East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections
420, 468,471 IPC, 120B IPC read with Section 420, 468,471,419 IPC
and Section 66C, 66D of the I.T. Act and has been sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 7 years with a fine of Rs.5 Lakhs and a default sentence u/s 420
IPC; R.I. for 7 years with a fine of Rs.5 Lakhs and a default sentence u/s
468 IPC; R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs.3 Lakhs and a default
sentence u/s 471 IPC; R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs.1 Lakh and a
default sentence u/s 120B IPC r/w Section 420, 468, 471, 419 IPC; R.I.
for 3 years with a fine of Rs.1 Lakh u/s 66 C I.T. Act ; R.I. for 3 years
with a fine of Rs.1 Lakh and a default sentence u/s 66D of the I.T. Act.
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently but fine imposed
under different heads / counts shall be paid separately.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the learned trial
court has failed to appreciate the seizure list witnesses i.e., P.W.10 and
P.W.11, who have not supported the case of the prosecution with respect
to seizure of the various articles rather they categorically stated in their
cross examination that police had taken their signature on a blank paper
where nothing was written at the time of taking of their signature.
Further, it has been pointed out that the learned trial court has also failed
to appreciate the deposition of witnesses such as P.W.1 Bikash Uraon,
P.W.2 Sanjay Kumar Sinha, P.W.4 Alok Mukhi, P.W.5 Samu Ram Sandil,
Laxmi Sandil, P.W.7 Damyanti Sandil and P.W.8 Graygori Toppo,
examined on behalf of the prosecution during course of the trial, who did
not state anything with regard to the commission of cybercrime nor they
have identified the appellant. Further, it has been pointed out that the
maximum sentence under various sections as awarded by the learned
court below is 7 years and the appellant has already served the sentence
for about 2 years 11 months i.e., from 13.07.2020 to 29.06.2021 in the
pre conviction period and from 26.08.2021 till date in the post-
conviction period. Further, it has been pointed out that co-accused Ritesh
Kumar has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 03.04.2023 in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 493 of 2021
and the case of this appellant stands on similar footing and since the
appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing in near future, appellant
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned A.P.P. on the other hand has opposed the contentions
raised by the appellant but did not controvert the fact with respect to
period of custody undergone by the appellant.
5. Having heard the parties, perused the record of the case.
6. In the light of the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of
the appellant, it is found just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail
during pendency of this appeal.
7. Accordingly, the appellant named above, is directed to be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge(Cyber Crime), East Singhbhum,
Jamshedpur in connection with in Cyber Crime Case No. 47 of 2020
arising out of Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 4 of 2020. I.A. No. 8451 of
2022 is allowed.
8. This appeal is already admitted. Put up this case along with
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 493 of 2021 under the heading for hearing in
seriatim.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
A.Mohanty
