Jharkhand High Court
Bigna Routiya Aged About 40 Years ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 November, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1485 of 2022
1.Bigna Routiya aged about 40 years son of Prem Routiya
2.Arjun Routiya aged about 56 years son of Late Amin Routiya
3.Manki Devi aged about 55 years wife of Arjun Routiya
4.Pradeep Routiya aged about 31 years, son of Gurudayal Routiya
5.Mangli Devi aged about 80 years wife of Late Modu Routiya
6.Ajay Routiya aged about 30 years son of Late Prem Routiya,
All are residents of village Tintanger Basai Toli, P.O. and Police
Station- Chainpur District- Gumla --- --- Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellants : Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.
Order No.06/ Dated 09th November, 2023
I.A. No. 9123 of 2023
The instant interlocutory application has been filed by appellant
no.1 Bigna Rautiya and appellant no.2 Arjun Rautiya for suspension of
their sentence under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of
conviction dated 23.09.2022 and order of sentence dated 29.09.2022
passed in Sessions Trial Case No. 78 of 2014 arising out of Chainpur
P.S. Case No. 25 of 2013 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-
cum Special Judge, Gumla whereby and whereunder, the aforesaid two
appellants along with other appellants have been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 147,148, 307,304 (Part-II), 504/149 of
the IPC and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years as well as
a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default thereof, they shall further
undergo R.I. for 6 months under Section 304(Part-II)/149 IPC; R.I. for
10 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof, they shall
further undergo R.I. 6 months each under Section 307/149 IPC;R.I. for 1
year with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default thereof, they shall
further undergo R.I. for 15 days u/s 147 IPC; R.I. for 2 years with a fine
of Rs. 2000/- and in default thereof, they shall further undergo R.I. for 1
month under Section 148 IPC and R.I. for 1 year with a fine of Rs.
1000/- and in default thereof, they shall further undergo R.I. for 15 days
u/s 504/149 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted by referring to the
testimony of the prosecution witnesses that none of the witnesses have
supported the prosecution version but the appellants have been
convicted.
3. Further contention has been made that out of the maximum
sentence of 10 years, appellant no. 1 Bigna Routiya has undergone the
period of custody for 9 years 10 months and 22 days while appellant no.
2 Arjun Routiya has undergone the period of custody for 9 years 10
months and 24 days.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that since the two
appellants could not be able to deposit the amount of penalty, they are
now serving the part of the sentence for non-deposit of the said fine
amount.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants, in the aforesaid premises, has
submitted that instant application may be allowed by suspending the
sentence.
6. While on the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed to the prayer
for bail on merits. However, he, while relying upon the affidavit filed on
behalf of the State with respect to period of custody of both the
appellants, has submitted that against the maximum sentence of 10
years, both the appellants have already undergone substantive part of the
sentence.
7. This Court, after considering the arguments advanced on behalf of
the parties and considering the documents appended to the affidavit,
which is the report submitted by the Superintendent of Birsa Munda
Central Jail, Hotwar, Ranchi wherefrom it is evident that appellant no.1
Bigna Routiya and appellant no.2 Arjun Routiya have undergone the
period of custody for 9 years 10 months and 22 days and 9 years 10
months 24 days respectively, is of the view that it is a fit case where
sentence can be suspended of these two appellants.
8. Accordingly, the appellant no.1 Bigna Routiya and appellant no.2
Arjun Routiya, above named, are directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, Gumla in
connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 78 of 2014 arising out of
Chainpur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2013.
9. Consequently, I.A. No. 9123 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed
of.
10. However, any observation made herein above will not prejudice
the case of the parties on merits, since the appeal is pending for its
consideration under the heading for hearing.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
A.Mohanty
