Jharkhand High Court
Baby Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 January, 2024
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan, Ambuj Nath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 595 of 2022
---
1. Baby Devi
2. Ashok Prasad Mehta @ Bhola Prasad Mehta ....Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
----
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath
---
For the Appellants : Mr. P.P.N Roy, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Pandey A.N.Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Spl. P.P
---
05/08.01.2024 I. A. No. 10648 of 2022
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This Interlocutory Application has been preferred by the appellants for
suspension of sentence during pendency of this appeal in connection with S.T.
No. 43 of 2017, whereby both the appellants have been convicted mainly for
the offence punishable under Section 302/149 I.P.C.
3. Learned senior counsel for the appellants submits that if the opinion of
the Doctor will be perused, there is no cut injuries on the head of victim. He
further submits that after 18 days the victim died, but no Fardbeyan was
recorded by the prosecution during his illness and therefore it would be unfair
to say that there was direct nexus between fight and death. So far as the
appellant no. 1 is concerned, who is wife of appellant no. 2, the only allegation
is of handing over the axe to the appellant no.2 who has been alleged to give an
axe blow upon the victim. Further, there is no premeditation of mind and it was
basically a free fight and for that the appellants have been convicted; as such
both the appellants may be enlarged on bail during pendency of this appeal. He
lastly submits that other co-convicts have already been granted bail by
coordinate bench of this Court.
4. Learned Spl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants and
submits that there is no error in the judgment of conviction and sentence passed
by the learned trial Court.
5. Having heard learned counsels for the rival parties and after perusing the
LCR it appears that there is direct allegation against Bhola Prasad Mehta @
Ashok Prasad and the co-convict, namely, Mahru Manhto @ Mahru Prasad
Mehta and Nagina Devi @ Nagiya Devi, who have been granted bail by the
coordinate Division Bench of this Court in Cr. Appeal(D.B) No. 479 of 2022 is
entirely on different footing. It further appears from the deposition of P.W.3,
that Bhola Prasad Mehta after taking Tangi from his wife, Baby Devi assaulted
Chhatradhari Prasad Mehta from back side on his head, as a result he sustained
grievous injury and fell down on the ground. This specific deposition of P.W.3
contradicts the submission of learned sr. counsel for the appellants that three is
no cut injury, which is also corroborated by the deposition of the Doctor
(P.W.9) that the cause of death was due to hard and blunt substance. So far as
appellant no. 1 is concerned, the only allegation against her is that she handed
over the Tangi to Bhola Prasad Mehta.
6. Looking to overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined
to grant bail to the appellant no. 1, Baby Devi by granting privilege of
suspension of sentence during pendency of this appeal. Accordingly, appellant
no. 1, Baby Devi shall be released on bail, during the pendency of this appeal,
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VII, Hazaribagh in connection with Sessions Trial No. 43 of
2017.
7. So far as appellant no. 2, Ashok Prasad Mehta @ Bhola Prasad Mehta is
concerned, we are not inclined to enlarge him on bail. Accordingly, his prayer
for suspension of sentence during pendency of this appeal, is hereby rejected, at
this stage.
Consequently, I.A. No. 10648 of 2022 stands partly allowed.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
jk
