Jharkhand High Court
Rajendra Yadav @ Diwakar Jee 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. 848 of 2023
Rajendra Yadav @ Diwakar Jee, aged about 34 years, son of Laldhari
Yadav, resident of Village Kasmar, P.O. & P.S. Panki, District- Palamu
(Jharkhand) ... Appellant
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P.
-----
03/21.10.2024 I.A. No. 10715 of 2023
Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and
Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, 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. 10715 of 2023 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 17.10.2023 and 20.10.2023 respectively in
Sessions Trial No.87(S) of 2015, arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No.40 of
2015, G.R. Case No.244 of 2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I, Latehar and he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years
under Section 25(1-A)/35 of Arms Act and fine of Rs.10,000/- and R.I. for
five years under Section 26(2)/35 of Arms Act and fine of Rs.10,000/- and
in default of payment of each fine, he has been further directed to undergo
R.I. of six months and both the sentences have been directed to run
-1- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 848 of 2023
concurrently. He submits that maximum sentence is five years. He further
submits that the appellant has remained in custody for about 21 months. He
then submits that the co-accused has been granted bail in Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No.70 of 2018. He also submits that P.W.4 is the police personnel who was
the member of patrolling party and he has deposed that nothing has been
recovered from the possession of the present appellant.
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 21 months and co-accused has
been enlarged on bail in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.70 of 2018, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-I, Latehar in connection with
Sessions Trial No.87(S) of 2015, arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No.40 of
2015, G.R. Case No.244 of 2015.
7. Accordingly, I.A. No.10715 of 2023 is disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
-2- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 848 of 2023
