Jharkhand High Court
Roshan Munda @ Guti @ Rausan Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 816 of 2022
Roshan Munda @ Guti @ Rausan Munda ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
with
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 651 of 2019
Habil Mundu @ Habil Munda ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilendu Kumar, Advocate
[In Cr.A. (SJ) 816 of 2022]
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.PP
[In Cr.A. (SJ) 816 of 2022]
--------
th
Order No.05/Dated: 4 September, 2023
I.A. No. 833 of 2023
When the matter is called out, the learned counsel for the parties
are present.
The present Interlocutory Application has been filed under
section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 562 day's in filing
the present appeal.
Having been satisfied with the reasons stated in paragraph no.4
of this Interlocutory Application, delay of 562 day's in filing the present
criminal appeal is condoned.
IA No. 833 of 2023 is disposed of.
I.A. No. 5410 of 2023
This present Interlocutory Application has been filed for
suspension of sentence during pendency of this criminal appeal.
The present criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of
conviction dated 26.2.2019 and the order of sentence dated 6.3.2019, passed
by the learned District & Addl. Sessions Judge-1, Khnuti, whereby and
whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under sections
25(1-A)/35 and 26(2) 35 of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 7
years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and with default stipulation of SI for 6 months
each and u/s 25 (1-b)a/35 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 2
years with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, with default stipulation of SI for 3 months.
The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is
material contradiction in the deposition of witnesses which creates serious
doubt about the prosecution case. He has further submitted that no
incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant
and also there is no evidence on record to convict the appellant. He further
submits that the appellant has been in custody since 11.01.2019 and hence, he
has spent about 5 years in custody and, therefore, his prayer for suspension of
sentence, during pendency of appeal, may be considered.
The learned counsel for the State has opposed the present
interlocutory application.
Having gone through the records of the case, considering the
arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, also considering
the period of custody already spent by the appellant and in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the appellant, named above, is ordered to be
released on bail, during pendency of this appeal, on executing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Addl. Sessions
Judge-1, Khnuti, in connection with ST Case No. 148 of 2016 arising out of
Murhu P.S. Case No. 17 of 2016, corresponding to GR No. 89 of 2016,
subject to the condition that the appellant shall submit self-attested photocopy
of his Aadhar Card and mobile number before the learned court below which he
will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of the case
without prior permission of the Court.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 5410 of 2023 stands disposed of.
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 651 of 2019
No one appears on behalf of either side.
With a view to give one more chance to the learned counsel for the
appellant, put up this case on 12.9.2023.
Ms. Priya Shrestha, the learned Spl. PP shall argue in this case on
behalf of State.
Accordingly, name of Ms. Priya Shrestha, the learned Spl.PP be
reflected in the cause-list on behalf of State.
KNR (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
