Jharkhand High Court
Sheikh Naseem @ Pappu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 October, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 176 of 2024
Sheikh Naseem @ Pappu, aged about 40 years, son of Late Mustafa,
resident of village Barari, P.O. & P.S. Meharma, Dist. Godda
... Appellant
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr. S.C.-II
For the Informant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
Md. Faiyaj Alam, Advocate
-----
05/25.10.2024 I.A. No.2971 of 2024
Heard Mr. Pran Pranay, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Manish
Kumar, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Lukesh Kumar, learned counsel
for the informant.
2. I.A. No.2971 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. Pran Pranay, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 20.02.2024 and 21.02.2024 respectively by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Godda in connection with Sessions Trial
Case No.73/2021 arising out of Meharma P.S. Case No.21/2021,
corresponding to G.R. No.653/2021, T.R. No.2410/2021, whereby, he has
been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.25,000/- for the
offence under Section 307 of IPC and R.I. for 3 years with fine of
-1- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 176 of 2024
Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 325 of IPC and in default of
payment of each fine, he has been further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1
years and 6 months separately for each offence. The appellant has been
further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable
under Section 323 of IPC and the direction was there that all the sentences
shall run concurrently.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that there are 8
witnesses on behalf of the prosecution and all have stated that 3 persons
have assaulted and pursuant to that injury has been received by the
injured, who has been examined as P.W.7. He then submits that there are
general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. He further
submits that there are case and counter case between the parties and the
appellant's side has also file case against the informant's side being
Meharma P.S. Case No.20/2021 and in that case, cousin brother of the
appellant has received injury and subsequently he has died. He also submits
that the appellant has remained in custody for about 15 months.
6. Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Lukesh
Kumar, learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer on the ground
that even half of the sentence has not been completed by the appellant.
7. Considering that there are case and counter case between the parties
and cousin brother of the appellant has died in the said incident and all the
witnesses have stated that 3 persons have assaulted and the appellant has
remained in custody for about 15 months, during the pendency of this
criminal appeal, I am inclined to enlarge the above named appellant on bail
-2- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 176 of 2024
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-I, Godda in connection with Sessions Trial Case
No.73/2021 arising out of Meharma P.S. Case No.21/2021, corresponding to
G.R. No.653/2021, T.R. No.2410/2021.
8. Accordingly, I.A. No.2971 of 2024 is disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
-3- Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 176 of 2024
