Turbali Mian @ Quasim Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 4846 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Turbali Mian @ Quasim Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 May, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Ananda Sen, Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 943 of 2018
      Turbali Mian @ Quasim Mian                           ..... Appellant
                           Versus
      The State of Jharkhand                               ...... Respondent
                                            ----
      CORAM:         SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

---

For the Appellant(s) :- Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State :- A.P.P.

----

I.A. No. 392 of 2024.

14/03.05.2024 By way of filing this interlocutory application, the appellant has renewed his prayer to suspend the sentence and release him on bail, during pendency of this appeal.

2. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced in connection with Sessions Trial No. 232 of 2007 and Sessions Trial No. 485 of 2007 arising out of Bengabad P.S. 10 of 2007, G.R. No. 128 of 2007, for the offence under Section(s) 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P for the State 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 going through the record and considering that there is direct allegation of committing murder by arrow and earlier on 06.04.2022 prayer for suspending the sentence was rejected with liberty to the appellant to pray for early hearing of the appeal, the appellant has not prayed for early hearing of the appeal rather he has renewed his prayer for suspending the sentence and further the appellant is only in custody for eight years and four months whereas the appeals are being heard in which the appellants have remained in custody for more than 10 years, we are not inclined to release the appellant, named above, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected.

6. However, the appellant is at liberty to file an application praying therein for early hearing of this case.

(Ananda Sen, J.)

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) Satyarthi