Jharkhand High Court
Raju Yadav 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
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 497 of 2022
Raju Yadav ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
---------
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath
---------
For the Appellant : Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate
For the Respondent : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Special P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ashutosh Prasad Joshi, Advocate
---------
05/ 08.01.2024 I. A. No. 7986 of 2023:
Heard Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Special P.P. appearing for the
State assisted by Mr. Ashutosh Prasad Joshi, learned counsel for the
informant.
The instant interlocutory application has been preferred by the
appellant for grant of bail under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C., in connection
with Cr. Appeal No. 497 of 2022, which has been preferred against the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.05.2022 and
30.05.2022, respectively passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III,
Jamtara in S.T. No. 70 of 2019, arising out of Bindapathar P.S. Case No. 22
of 2019, corresponding to G.R. No. 22 of 2019, whereby the learned trial
court has held appellant guilty for the offence under Section 304(B) /34 of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced this appellant to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for life.
Learned sr. counsel for the appellant submits that the order of sentence
for life itself is perverse as there are contradictory statements of mother-in-
law of the victim. He further submits that there is an omnibus allegation
against this appellant and all other co-convict have been granted bail by this
Court save and except this appellant only for the reason that he being the
husband. He further draws attention towards deposition of P.W.6 and submits
that P.W.6- Doctor has deposed that the victim died due to Asphyxia caused
of hanging and hanging was suicidal. Further, the deposition of other PWs
clearly goes to show that the relationship of this appellant with that of the
victim were cordial and noting is in the deposition of either of the PWs that
there was any demand of dowry just before the death of the occurrence.
Stressing this point learned senior counsel reiterated that the appellant
should be enlarged on bail during the pendency of this appeal as the
appellant has completed almost 4½ years and he is having a good ground on
merits of the case but since this appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no
likelihood of early hearing of this case, as such interlocutory application for
suspension of sentence may be allowed.
Learned Special P. P. as well as learned counsel for the informant has
opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and submits that the appellant
being the husband was duty bound to protect his wife and there is no error in
the impugned judgment and appellant has not completed even 5 years of his
sentence. Further, learned Spl. P.P. contended that there is no error in the
judgment and even otherwise, under Section 304 B the suicidal act will also
come in the purview of under Section 304 B.
Having regard to the facts of the case and looking to the depositions of
the informant and P.W.6-Doctor coupled with the fact that there is omnibus
allegation against this appellant and there is no likelihood of early hearing of
this appeal, and the appellant had also completed 4 ½ years approx.; as such
we are inclined to enlarge this appellant on bail. Accordingly, during
pendency of this appeal, the appellant above named is directed to be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge III, Jamtara in connection with Sessions Trial No.
70 of 2019, arising out of Bindapathar P. S. Case No. 22 of 2019,
corresponding to G. R. No. 271 of 2019, 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.
I. A. No. 7986 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Pramanik/
