Jharkhand High Court
Sikhu Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand & Another on 1 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 1492 of 2022
Sikhu Mahto --- --- Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & another --- --- Opposite Parties
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl. P.P.
05/01.05.2023 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State in I.A.
No. 2044 of 2023.
2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the instant criminal
revision application has been preferred against the judgment / order
dated 25.08.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Ramgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 2017 whereby and where under
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Ramgarh has dismissed the
appeal preferred by the present petitioner against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 01.09.2017 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ramgarh in G.R. Case No. 2893 of 2007
(T.R. No. 201 of 2017) whereby and where under the learned Trial Court
had convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section
497 and 498 of the I.P.C and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two
years with a fine of Rs.4000/- and in case of default of payment of fine,
to further undergo S.I. for three months u/s 497 I.P.C. and further
sentenced him R.I. for one year with a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of
payment of fine, to further undergo S.I. for one month u/s 498 IPC.
Further it is submitted that this petitioner is in jail since 01.12.2022
when he voluntarily surrendered before the concerned court below.
3. It has been pointed out that the learned Trial Court did not
appreciate the evidences available on record in the right perspective and
same has not been appreciated by the lower appellate court on merits as
the lower appellate court has dismissed the appeal as not maintainable as
no one was appearing on behalf of the appellant and the appeal has been
dismissed without hearing the appellant in his absence behind the back
of the petitioner in the present case. It has further been pointed out that it
is well settled principle of law that a criminal appeal is not to be
disposed of without hearing the appellant either by the concerned lawyer
of the appellant or by appellant himself or by appointing the amicus
curiae or Legal Aid defence counsel of DLSA and in this connection
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has relied upon
rulings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhananjay Rai @
Guddu Rai Vrs. State of Bihar reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 880. It
has further been pointed out that in the present case when the appellant
did not appear either by his counsel or by himself, then the learned court
below, without proper application of the judicial mind, dismissed the
appeal as not maintainable, which is not tenable in the eyes of law.
4. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State did not controvert
the fact that the appeal has not been disposed of on merits because of the
non-appearance of the appellant.
5. I have taken into consideration the aforesaid submissions and
perused the record of the case.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the
forceful submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is found just
and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner,
named above, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st
Class, Ramgarh in connection with G.R. Case No. 2893 of 2007 (T.R.
No. 201 of 2017) subject to the condition as set out under Section 439 of
the Cr.P.C. with further condition that the petitioner shall remain present
on each and every date before this Court in the criminal revision, either
through himself or his learned counsel, failing which, appropriate order
shall be passed for the cancellation of this bail. I.A. No. 2044 of 2023 is
allowed.
7. Further the entire scanned copy of the record of the Lower
Appellate Court be called in connection Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 2017
from the concerned court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Ramgarh. Learned counsel for the petitioner is also directed to take steps
for impleading the informant Lakhindra Mahto P.W.4 as one of the
opposite parties in the course of the day and take steps for issuance of
notice under ordinary process and registered cover with A/D for which
requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks, failing which, this
revision shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
A.Mohanty
