Jharkhand High Court
Anil Kumar Singh vs The Union Of India Through on 6 October, 2023
1 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.354 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.354 of 2022
Anil Kumar Singh ..... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through
Central Bureau of Investigation, Ranchi .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellant : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nitish Parth Sarthi, A.C. to ASGI
-----
7/06.10.2023 Heard learned defence counsel Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda
appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Nitish
Parth Sarthi, associate counsel of learned ASGI Mr. Anil Kumar
appearing on behalf of the CBI.
2. I.A. No. 6281 of 2023 has been filed on behalf of the appellant
with a prayer to confirm the provisional bail granted to the appellant
by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum-Special
Judge, CBI Ranchi in R.C. No.13(A)/2006-R after passing the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
28.04.2022.
3. Learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant
submitted that after pronouncement of judgement of conviction and
order of sentence by the learned court below, the appellant was
directed to be enlarged on provisional bail vide order dated
28/4/2022 for a period of 30 days.
4. Further it has been pointed out that the present appeal is against
the impugned judgement of conviction and order of sentence, which
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.354 of 2022
was filed within the stipulated period of time, i.e. on 12/5/2022, but
somehow, the case was not taken up and therefore the provisional bail
granted to the appellant by the learned court below was not
considered by this court in order to get it confirmed.
5. Further it has been pointed out that vide order dated 29/6/2022,
the provisional bail granted to the appellant vide order dated
28/4/2022 was extended for 15 days and the said order dated
29/6/2022 has also been annexed along with I.A. No. 6281 of 2023,
which is available on record, but it is submitted that despite the
extension of the provisional bail, the matter could not be taken up for
hearing by this Court in order to confirm the provisional bail and
therefore the period of provisional bail has also been expired and
therefore it is submitted that the provisional bail granted to the
appellant by the learned court below may be confirmed during
pending of this appeal.
6. Learned associate counsel Mr. Nitish Parth Sarthi to learned
ASGI Mr. Anil Kumar appearing on behalf of the CBI submitted that it
is a fact that after passing the impugned judgement of conviction and
order of sentence, the appellant was granted provisional bail vide
order dated 28.04.2022 and further the provisional bail was also
extended for 15 days vide order dated 29.06.2022. Learned associate
counsel also did not controvert the fact that this appeal was filed
within time, i.e. on 12/5/2022 and somehow the matter could not be
3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.354 of 2022
taken up by this court for consideration of the confirmation of the
provisional bail.
7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the
record of this case.
8. In view of the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, the
provisional bail granted vide order dated 28.04.2022 and further
extended by the order dated 29.06.2022 is hereby confirmed.
9. Accordingly, I.A. No.6281 of 2023 gets disposed of.
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.354 of 2022
10. This appeal is admitted for hearing.
11. Let the scanned copy of the lower court record be called for.
12. The earlier I.A. No.4302 of 2022 also gets disposed of
accordingly.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.Kumar
