Jharkhand High Court
Rabua Birua vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 January, 2024
Author: Ratnaker Bhengra
Bench: Ratnaker Bhengra, Navneet Kumar
1 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.870 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.870 of 2023
1. Rabua Birua
2. Soma Birua ..... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellants : Ms. Tejaswi, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondent : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, APP
-----
Order No.7: Dated 24 January 2024
th
Heard.
Admit.
I.A. No.5038 of 2023
The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the
appellants for suspension of sentence, during pendency of this criminal
appeal, which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 29.06.2022 passed by learned Session Judge, West
Singhbhum, Chaibasa, in S.T. No. 93 of 2022 arising out of Hatgamharia
P.S. Case No.06 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the appellants have
been convicted and sentenced to R.I for 10 years along with a fine of
Rupees ten thousand u/s 307/34 of Indian Penal Code and in default of
payment of fine, further directed to undergo S.I. for six months.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has argued that in
this case, there is only allegation of assaulting the sole injured person,
who is PW-1, the informant himself and he claimed to have received
head injuries, however, learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that as per the doctor's evidence, though it has been indicated
2 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.870 of 2023
as being grievous in nature, the wound is only indicated as a cut and not
lacerated. It has further been stated that if the injury had been grievous
in nature, he would not have been at his home next day, further more so
he is senior citizen, aged over 63 years. Moreover, it is alleged that he
was also attacked on the back, but there is no injury on the back, so,
learned counsel contended that it is clearly a case of exaggeration in the
allegations. Further the learned counsel for the appellants has stated that
from the FIR itself it emerges that there was quarrel over stoppage of
taking water from the pond of the victim, therefore it seems that the
alleged quarrel has emerged and then alleged assault is said to have been
taken place. It has further submitted that as important element under
Section 307 of IPC is 'intention' and in such a situation, it is clear that
there was no intention to cause such lacerated injury, particularly, it is
sudden fight and therefore, Section 307 of IPC would not be attracted. It
has further been stated that the only eyewitness is PW-1, the injured
himself and therefore only to rely on the sole witness for such faulty
accusation would be doubtful. There is no other eyewitness, because the
I.O. has also said that there was no resident nearby. Further, the learned
counsel for the appellants has stated that the allegation of being
assaulted by 'kudal' by 'danda' is also doubtful as the same was not
recovered. On such submission, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants submitted that prayer for granting bail should be allowed.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State
opposed for suspension of sentence and said that the informant himself
is the injured eyewitness and the injuries are also supported by the
3 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.870 of 2023
evidence of the Doctor (PW-7) who has indicated that the injured-victim
has received two injuries on head and both the injuries are grievous in
nature.
4. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, gone
across the findings of the learned court below in the impugned order and
also the lower court records.
5. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellants, named
above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Session Judge, West
Singhbhum, in S.T. No. 93 of 2022 arising out of Hatgamharia P.S. Case
No.06 of 2022 .
6. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application being I.A.
No.5038 of 2023 stands disposed of.
7. Ms. Tejaswi, learned counsel has been appointed by Jharkhand
High Court Legal Services Committee, Ranchi on behalf of the appellants
to defend their case.
8. Accordingly, the fee, as per rule, shall be disbursed to her as per
appearance in this case.
9. Let a copy of this Order be communicated to the Jharkhand High
Court Legal Services Committee for the needful.
(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.Kumar
