Jharkhand High Court
Jamaluddin @ Jamal vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
I.A. No. 3780 of 2023
in
Criminal Revision No. 389 of 2021
---------
Jamaluddin @ Jamal ..... Petitioner
Versus
1.State of Jharkhand
2.Jhunjhun Kumar Gupta
..... Opp. Parties
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Birendra Burman, Advocate
---------
I.A. No. 3780 of 2023
06/19.07.2023 This Criminal Re vision Application has been filed
on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated
24.03.2021 passed by Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, District &
Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bokaro in Criminal Appeal No.
181 of 2019, dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 29.08.2019
passed by the court of Ms. Sandhya Prasad, Judicial
Magistrate, Ist Class, Bokaro in G.R. Case No. 1151 of 2017,
corresponding to T.R. Case No. 56 of 2019 (Sector 12 P.S. Case
No. 60 of 2017), whereby the petitioner has been convicted for
the offence under Section 304 (A) of the I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year with fine
of Rs. 10,000/-. However, the court below has acquitted the
petitioner for the offence under Section 279 of the I.P.C.
2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed on
behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.
3. Heard Mr. Afaque Rashidi, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Spl.P.P. for the State and
Mr. Birendra Burman, learned counsel for O.P. No. 2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that he has surrendered on 13.4.2023 and since then he is in
custody. It is submitted that the impugned judgments and
order of sentence are not sustainable in the eye of law as the
Courts below have not properly appreciated the evidence of
prosecution witnesses and hence the petitioner may be enlarged
on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. opposed the
prayer for bail.
6. Learned counsel for the O.P. 2 has opposed the
prayer for bail on the ground that there are concurrent findings
of fact against the petitioner as both the learned court below
have found him guilty for the offence under Section 304 (A) of
the I.P.C.
7. Perused the lower court record of this case and
report submitted by the learned Secretary, D.L.S.A., Bokaro
vide Letter No. 2433 of 2023 dated 14.06.2023 and considered
the submission of both the sides.
8. It transpires from the impugned judgments that
the petitioner is the driver of the bus.
9. It appears that the petitioner is in custody since
13.4.2023. It also appears that the widow of the deceased had
received compensation of Rs. 4,40,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh
Forty Thousand only) in Miscellaneous Case No. 83/2018
arising out of said W.C. Case No. 39 of 2017 vide order dated
02.11.2018 by the Labour Court, Hazaribagh.
10. Considering the custody period and the facts and
circumstances of this case, the petitioner, namely Jamaluddin
@ Jamal is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Ist Class, Bokaro in connection with G.R. Case No.
1151 of 2017, subject to the condition that one of the bailors
must be own relative of the petitioner.
11. Thus, I.A. No. 3780 of 2023 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
Criminal Revision No. 389 of 2021
12. Lower Court Record has already been received.
13. O.P. No. 2 has already appeared.
14. Put up this case after one year under the same
heading.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
s.m.
