Binod Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 7587 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Binod Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 August, 2024

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 1744 of 2023
                                         ------
           Binod Yadav                                                .... Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
           The State of Jharkhand                                   ....Respondent(s)
                                         With
                       Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 1751 of 2023
                                         ------
           Sudhir Yadav @ Sudhir Kumar Yadav                          .... Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
           The State of Jharkhand                                 ....Respondent(s)
                                          ------
                 CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

For the Appellant(s) : M/s Indrajit Sinha and Akhouri Awinash Kumar, Advocates (Cr.A.1744 of 2023).

Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate (Cr.A. 1751 of 2023) For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P. Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, A.P.P.

------

I.A. No. 5823 of 2024 in Cr.A (DB) No. 1744 of 2023 & I.A. No. 310 of 2024 in Cr.A.(DB) No. 1751 of 2023

05/01.08.2024: These interlocutory application has been filed by the appellants, namely, Binod Yadav and Sudhir Yadav @ Sudhir Kumar Yadav, praying therein to suspend the sentence and release them on bail during the pendency of these appeals.

2. The appellants have been been convicted in connection with Sessions Trial No. 77 of 2015 for the offence under Section(s) 364A, 365 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. They have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence under Section 364A IPC and other sentences for the other offences.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.P.Ps and have gone through the impugned judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

4. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the bail, which the State availed and opposed.

5. After hearing the parties and going through the deposition of the witnesses, we find that while ransom amount was being paid to these appellants, they were nabbed by the police and arrested from the spot.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, we are not inclined to allow this interlocutory application. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellants, named above, is rejected.

7. Accordingly, these interlocutory applications are dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Anu/-Cp3