Jairam Bhuiyan Aged About 40 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 8671 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Jairam Bhuiyan Aged About 40 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 September, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                     Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.534 of 2023
                                         ----

Jairam Bhuiyan aged about 40 years son of Jungali Bhuiya, resident of Village Ram Kanda, PO and PS Ramkanda, District Garhwa.

.... Appellant(s)

-- Versus --

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

           For the Appellant(s)        :- Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate
           For the State               :- Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
                                          ----
4/30.09.2024     Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for

          the respondent State.

2. This appeal is already admitted and the lower court records are on the

record.

3. I.A. No. 7176 of 2024 has been filed for suspension of sentence during

pendency of this appeal.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has

been convicted by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

18.07.2023 and 24.07.2023 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No.176 of

2016, arising out of Ramkanda P.S. Case No.11 of 2016, G.R. No.1017 of 2016,

by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Garhwa, where by appellant has been

convicted under sections 308 and 341 of the IPC and appellant has been

sentenced to undergo RI for five years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in

default of payment of fine further three months RI under section 308 IPC and

the appellant has further been sentenced to undergo SI for one month along

with fine of Rs.200/- and in default thereof, three days SI under section 341 IPC

and both the sentences shall run concurrently.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the said occurrence is

said to be occurred on 12.05.2016 and the FIR was registered on 15.05.2016

and there is no explanation of inordinate delay in instituting the FIR. He submits 1 Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.534 of 2023 that father of the injured and the informant are serving the life sentence for

murder of his own father and for that case the appellant due to enmity he has

been implicated in the present case. He further submits that during trial the

appellant remained in custody from 16.05.2020 to 16.08.2020 and after trial, he

is in custody since 18.07.2023 and remained in custody for more than 1 year

and five months.

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 appellant has remained in custody for one year and

five months and there is enmity between the parties and for that the father of

the injured and the informant are serving life sentence for murder of own father

and further there is delay in institution of the FIR, I am inclined to suspend the

sentence of the appellant, during pendency of this appeal.

8. Accordingly, the appellant- Jairam Bhuiyan, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-I, Garhwa, in

connection with Sessions Trial No.176 of 2016, arising out of Ramkanda P.S.

Case No.11 of 2016, G.R. No.1017 of 2016.

9. I.A. No. 7176 of 2024 stands disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/

2 Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.534 of 2023