Diwakar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3559 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   Cr. Revision No. 993 of 2023
     Diwakar Singh                           .... ... Petitioner
                            Versus

     The State of Jharkhand                     ....     ... Opp. Party
                          ---------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shashi Kumar Verma, A.P.P.

--------

Order No. 03/ dated 19.09.2023

I.A.No.7893 of 2023

This Interlocutory Application has been preferred with

the prayer to condone the delay in preferring this Cr. Revision

against the impugned order.

2. The cause shown for delay in the I.A. is found sufficient.

3. Accordingly, delay of 50 days' in preferring this Cr.

Revision is hereby condoned.

4. I.A.No.7893 of 2023 stands disposed of.

5. List on 03.10.2023.

Cr. Revision No. 993 of 2023

Learned Counsel Mr. Abhijeet Kumar on behalf of the

petitioner and on behalf of the State, learned A.P.P. are

present.

2. This Cr. Revision is against the Judgment of conviction

and sentence dated 07.02.2023 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 16 of

2015 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sahibganj wherein

the Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 18.02.2015

passed in G.R.No. 290 of 2002 corresponding to T.R.No.482 of

2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj has

been affirmed.

3. Admit.

4. Office is directed to call for the L.C.R.

5. List this Cr. Revision for hearing as per seriatim.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also

submitted that in this Cr. Revision itself he has sought prayer

to release the petitioner on bail during the pendency of this Cr.

Revision.

7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted

that the trial court has convicted the petitioner for the offence

under Section 25 (1-b) (a) of the Arms Act for two years and for

the offence under Section 26 of Arms Act for one year. The

Appellate Court had modified the sentence from two years to

one year for the offence under Section 25(1-b) (a) of Arm Act

and fine of Rs.1000/- and for the offence under Section 26 of

the Arms Act from one year to six months and fine of

Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall

also undergo S.I. of one month.

8. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted

that he has served out the sentence for six months in Jail and

also keeping in view the fact that this Criminal Revision is not

likely to be heard in near future contended to release on bail.

9. The learned A.P.P. opposed the contention made by the

learned Counsel for the petitioner.

10. In view of the submissions made and material on record

and also taking into consideration the sentence passed by the

court and the sentence which the petitioner has served out, it

is a fit case for releasing the petitioner on bail during the

pendency of this Cr. Revision.

11. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on

bail, during the pendency of this Cr. Revision, on furnishing

bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand)

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj or his

successor Courts in connection with G.R.No.290 of 2002,

corresponding to T.R.No. 482 of 2015, arising out of Sahibganj

(T) P.S. Case No. 112 of 2002.

(Subhash Chand, J.) P.K.S