Jharkhand High Court
Sanjay Kumar Ramani vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 October, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 503 of 2024
1. Sanjay Kumar Ramani, aged about 35 years, son of late Sriram Ramani,
resident of Village Naya Bazar, P.O. and P.S. Bardwa, District-Sahebganj
(Jharkhand)
2. Gautam Ravi Das, aged about 29 years, son of Dhaneshwar Ravi Das,
resident of Village Harijanpara, Bardwa, P.O. and P.S. Bardwa, District-
Sahebganj, Jharkhand
..... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Respondent
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
---
For the Appellant(s) :- Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Amrita Kumari, Advocate
----
03/24.10.2024 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
counsel for the respondent State.
2. This appeal is already admitted and the trial court records are
on the record.
3. I.A. No. 10731 of 2024 has been filed for grant of bail and
suspension of sentence during pendency of this appeal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been convicted by the judgment dated 23.07.2024 and
order of sentence dated 27.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner -XV, Ranchi in S.T. Case No.464 of 2018 arising out of Ratu
P.S. Case No.153 of 2017 whereby the appellants have been convicted for
the offence under sections 399 and 402 of IPC and sentenced them to
undergo R.I for five years with fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default thereof,
further sentenced to SI for nine months and also sentenced for three
years with fine of Rs.8000/- under section 402 IPC and in default of fine
shall further sentenced to SI of five months and all the sentences shall
run concurrently.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants
were all along on bail during trial and they have been taken in custody
since 23.7.2024 and since then they are in custody. He submits that
nothing has been recovered from the possession of the appellants. He
further submits that co-accused has been granted bail in Criminal
Appeal (SJ) No. 543 of 2024 by order dated 30.09.2024.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent State opposed the prayer
for bail on the ground that half of the sentence has not been completed
by the appellant.
7. Considering that the appellants were all along on bail during
the trial and they are in custody since 23.7.2024 and co-accused has
been granted bail in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 543 of 2024 by order dated
30.09.2024 I am inclined to grant bail to the appellants.
8. Accordingly, above named appellants 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 learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner -XV, Ranchi in S.T. Case No.464 of 2018 arising out of Ratu
P.S. Case No.153 of 2017.
9. The aforesaid I.A. stands disposed of.
10. Let this appeal be tagged with Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 543
of 2024.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J)
Satyarthi
