Arman Ali Ansari @ Arman Ali vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 10071 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Arman Ali Ansari @ Arman Ali vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 October, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 172 of 2024
            Arman Ali Ansari @ Arman Ali, aged about 25 years, s/o Hussain Ali Ansari,
            R/o Mauza Azad Nagar, Ward No.2, P.O. & P.S. Dumariaganj, District-
            Sidharth Nagar (U.P.)                              ... Appellant
                                      -Versus-
            The State of Jharkhand                              ... Respondent
                                           -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

            For the Appellant        : Mr. Sharabhil Ahmed, Advocate
            For the State            : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P.
                                           -----

10/21.10.2024     I.A. No. 2970 of 2024

Heard Mr. Sharabhil Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant and

Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the State.

2. This appeal has already been admitted and the Trial Court Record is

on the record.

3. I.A. No. 2970 of 2024 has been filed for grant of bail and suspension

of sentence, during pendency of the present criminal appeal.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the

appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 01.06.2023 and 03.06.2023 respectively in

Special POCSO Case No.98/2021 arising out of Pindrajora P.S. Case

No.113/2021, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bokaro

and he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and fine of

Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 366 of IPC and in default of

payment of fine, he has been further directed to undergo S.I. of six months.

He submits that maximum sentence is five years and the appellant has

already remained in custody for about one year and four months. He further

submits that the appellant and the victim were in relationship and she was aged about 16 years and she on her willingness had gone with the

appellant. He then submits that the age of the victim was such that she was

able to take decision on her discretion and she was also sensible and aware

of the intention of the accused. He also submits that both had gone with

their willingness.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer on the

ground that even half of the sentence has not been completed by the

appellant.

6. Considering that the maximum sentence is five years and the

appellant has remained in custody for about one year and four months and

the appellant and victim were in relationship and she had gone with the

appellant on her willingness, during the pendency of the present 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) with

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

learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bokaro in connection with Special

POCSO Case No.98/2021 arising out of Pindrajora P.S. Case No.113/2021.

7. Accordingly, I.A. No.2970 of 2024 is disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/