Rahul Kumar Aged About 25 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9836 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Rahul Kumar Aged About 25 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 October, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                       ----

Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.138 of 2024

----

Rahul Kumar aged about 25 years son of Bijay Mahto resident of Village Manatu PO and PS Keredari District Hazaribagh .... Appellant(s)

-- Versus --

            The State of Jharkhand                       .... Respondents
                                            ----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

             For the Appellant(s)     :- Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
                                         Mr. Nishant Roy, Advocate
           For the State          :-     Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
                                         ----
5/03.10.2024     Heard Mr. Mazumdar, the learned senior counsel for the appellant and

the learned counsel for the respondent State.

2. I.A. No. 5625 of 2024 has been filed for suspension of sentence during

pendency of the appeal.

3. Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the appellant submits that

appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction and order of

sentence dated 16.02.2024 by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge I,

Chatra in connection with Sessions Trial No.53 of 2022 arising out of Simariya

PS Case No.150 of 2021, and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years along with

fine of Rs.5000/- under section 414 IPC and further sentenced to undergo

seven years RI and find of Rs.5000/- under section 26(2) of Arms Act and

sentenced under other sections.

4. He submits that the appellant has remained in custody from

19.11.2021 to 24.02.2022 and thereafter he was on bail during trial and he was

further taken into custody on the date of judgment dated 07.02.2024. He draws

the attention of the Court to paragraph no.28 of the judgment and submits that

nothing was proved that has come with regard to the accused persons have not

committed criminal conspiracy against any of the victim person. He submits that

in view of that no arms has been recovered and only mobile phone has been

recovered from the possession of the appellant.

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

ground that half of the sentence has not been completed by the appellant.

6. Considering that the appellant has remained in custody for 19.11.2021 to

24.02.2022 and no arms has been recovered from the possession of the

appellant and in paragraph no.28 of the judgment of the learned court it has

come that it was not proved that the accused persons have committed criminal

conspiracy against any of the victim or person and in view of the same, I am

inclined to grant bail to the appellant.

7. Accordingly, the appellant-Rahul Kumar is, hereby, directed to be

released on bail, during pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of

Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each,

to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge I, Chatra in

connection with Sessions Trial No.53 of 2022 arising out of Simariya PS Case

No.150 of 2021.

8. The instant I.A. meant for grant of bail stands disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/