Sanjay Hansda vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9761 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sanjay Hansda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 October, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                    Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 167 of 2024
                 Sanjay Hansda, age about 39 years, son of Late Lalo Hansda, resident of
                 village Nawadih, P.O. & P.S. Dhab, District- Koderma ... Appellant
                                              -Versus-
                 The State of Jharkhand                               ... Respondent
                                                   -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

                 For the Appellant           : Ms. Amrita Sinha, Advocate
                 For the State               : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P.
                                                   -----

05/01.10.2024             I.A. No. 3846 of 2024

Heard Ms. Amrita Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant

and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned counsel appearing for the State.

2. I.A. No.3846 of 2024 has been filed for condonation of delay of 186

days in filing the instant memo of appeal.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the

appellant is not in a position to file the appeal and the file has been

entrusted to her by the Jharkhand High Court Legal Services Committee

and, thereafter, the appeal has been presented.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has got no serious objection

if the said delay is condoned.

5. The Court finds that sufficient cause is made out to condone the

delay and, as such, the delay of 186 days in filing the instant memo of

appeal is, hereby, condoned.

6. Accordingly, I.A. No.3846 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.

7. Admit.

8. Call for the L.C.R. from the Court concerned.

9. I.A. No.3847 of 2024 has been filed for suspension of sentence,

during the pendency of the instant criminal appeal.

10. By way of referring the judgment of the learned trial court, learned

counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the period of custody of

the appellant is recorded at internal page 3 of the judgment. She submits

that when the judgment was dictated, the appellant was remained in

custody for about 1 year and 8 months and now he has remained in custody

for 2 years and 11 months and the sentence is for 5 years. She submits that

the appellant has already completed more than half of the sentence.

11. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the ground that

there is recovery from the house of the appellant.

12. Considering that the appellant has already remained in custody for

more than half of the sentence and in the attending facts and circumstances

of the case, during the pendency of this appeal, I am inclined to suspend

the sentence and enlarge him on bail on his 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-II,

Koderma in connection with S.T. No.150 of 2015, arising out of Dhab P.S.

Case No.02 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No.11 of 2015.

13. Accordingly, I.A. No.3847 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/