Jharkhand High Court
Tajmul Kaji @ Tajammul Kaji vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 November, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 574 of 2024
1. Tajmul Kaji @ Tajammul Kaji, aged about 30 years, son of late Abdul
Mannan Kaji, resident of Village- Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora,
P.S. Chandankiyari (Barmasia), District- Bokaro
2. Mohammaddulah Kaji, aged about 58 years, son of late Abdul Rahim
Kaji, resident of Village Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora, P.S.
Chandankiyari (Barmasia), District- Bokaro
3. Muslim Kaji @ Mursalim Kaji, aged about 37 years, son of Islam Kaji,
resident of Village Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora, P.S.
Chandankiyari (Barmasia), District- Bokaro
4. Basir Kaji, aged about 57 years, son of Late Payjan Kaji, resident of
Village- Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora, P.S. Chandankiyari
(Barmasia), District- Bokaro
5. Latif Kaji, aged about 76 years, son of Late Payjan Kaji, resident of
Village Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora, P.S. Chandankiyari
(Barmasia), District- Bokaro
6. Md. Abdul Kaji @ Abdulla Kaji, aged about 40 years, son of Islam Kaji,
resident of Village Nawadih Nichey Tola, P.O. Banstora, P.S.
Chandankiyari (Barmasia), District- Bokaro ... Appellants
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Appellants : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Spl.P.P.
-----
03/11.11.2024 Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel for the appellants
and Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, learned counsel for the State.
2. This appeal is already admitted and Trial Court Record has been
received.
3. I.A. No. 11985 of 2024 has been filed for grant of bail by suspending
the sentence, during pendency of the instant appeal.
4. Learned senior counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants
have been convicted to undergo RI for four years under Section 429 of the
IPC along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and there are other sentences, however,
direction is there that all the sentences will run concurrently and that has
been passed by the judgment dated 16.08.2024 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bokaro in Sessions Trial Case No.210 of 2019
-1- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 574 of 2024
[arising out of Chandankiyari P.S. Case No.82 of 2018, G.R. No.973 of
2018].
5. Learned senior counsel for the appellants further submits that the
names of the appellants have come in the case by way of confession of auto
drivers and they were all along on bail during the trial and now they are in
custody since the date of judgment dated 16.08.2024. He also submits that
the witnesses of the seizure list have not been examined and in spite of that
the conviction has been made. He then submits that the auto drivers have
been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.599 of 2024 vide order
dated 28.10.2024.
6. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of bail on the
ground that even half of the sentence has not been completed by the
appellants.
7. Considering that the appellants were all along on bail during trial and
now they are in custody since the date of judgment from 16.08.2024 and
seizure list witnesses have not been examined, I am inclined to grant bail to
the appellants, during pendency of this appeal.
8. Accordingly, the appellants, above named, are directed to be released
on bail, during pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like
amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Bokaro in Sessions Trial Case No.210 of 2019 [arising out of Chandankiyari
P.S. Case No.82 of 2018, G.R. No.973 of 2018].
9. Accordingly, I.A. No.11985 of 2024 is disposed of.
10. Let this appeal be tagged with Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.599 of 2024.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
-2- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 574 of 2024
