Md. Jalil vs State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 10612 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Md. Jalil vs State Of Jharkhand on 25 November, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 471 of 2024
            Md. Jalil, aged about 65 years, son of Munni Miyan, resident of Village
            Mauza Bishnugarh, P.O. Bishnugarh, P.S. Bishnugarh, District-
            Hazaribagh/Jharkhand                               ... Appellant
                                      -Versus-
            State of Jharkhand                                 ... Respondent
                                             -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

            For the Appellant          : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate
            For the State              : Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, A.P.P.
                                             -----

03/25.11.2024        I.A. No.11591 of 2024

Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellant and Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the

State.

2. I.A. No.11591 of 2024 has been filed for grant of bail and suspension

of sentence, during pendency of the present criminal appeal.

3. This appeal is already admitted and the Trial Court Records has been

received.

4. Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant

submits that the appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment

of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.07.2024 and 23.07.2024

respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Hazaribag

in connection with G.R. Case No.1380/2012 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case

No.360/2012, whereby, he has been convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B)

and 22(b) of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and to

pay fine of Rs.30,000/- and there is another sentence also and the direction

was there that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

-1- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 471 of 2024

5. Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant

further submits that the alleged recovery of contraband was intermediary

which is only 10 Kg, whereas, commercial quantity comes to 20 Kg. He also

submits that the appellant has remained in custody for about 11 months

and odd and the appellant was on bail during the pendency of trial.

6. Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the State

opposed the prayer on the ground that even half of the sentence has not

been completed as yet by the appellant.

7. Considering that the appellant has remained in custody for about 11

months and odd and the alleged contraband recovery from the possession

of the appellant is intermediary and it was pointed out that the appellant

has got no criminal antecedent, during the pendency of this criminal appeal,

I am inclined to enlarge the above named appellant on bail on furnishing

bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two

sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional

Sessions Judge-II, Hazaribag in connection with G.R. Case No.1380/2012

arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No.360/2012

8. Accordingly, I.A. No.11591 of 2024 is disposed of.

                                                   (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/




                                           -2-                     Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 471 of 2024