Jitan Modi @ Jiten Kr. Modi vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 8703 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Jitan Modi @ Jiten Kr. Modi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 September, 2024

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 710 of 2024

            Jitan Modi @ Jiten Kr. Modi                         ...... Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
         1. The State of Jharkhand
         2. X                                                   ......Respondent(s)
                                           ------
                  CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

For the Appellant(s) : M/s Saba Ali, Advocate.

            For the State          : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P.
                                          ------
                             I.A. No. 8779 of 2024

05/02.09.2024:         Counsel for the appellant seeks permission to mention the

provision of law in this application in course of the day.

2. Prayer is allowed.

3. Let the necessary incorporation be made in this application in red ink in course of the day.

4. This interlocutory application has been filed by the appellant praying therein to suspend the sentence and release him on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

5. The appellant has been been convicted in connection with SC/ST Act Case No. 22/2023 for the offence under Section(s) 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 376 (1) of the Indian Penal Code.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P and have gone through the impugned judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

7. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the bail, which the State availed and opposed.

8. The allegation against this appellant that he has committed rape upon the victim (P.W.1) who was aged about 26 years at the time of occurrence.

9. After hearing the parties and going through the deposition of P.W.1, we find that though she had immediately narrated the occurrence to her husband, but surprisingly, the FIR was lodged after seventeen days. From paragraph 1 of the cross-examination, we could understand that building materials i.e. stone-chips, iron rod and cement were supplied by this appellant, the cost of which was about to Rs.60,000/-. She does not even know how much money has been paid by her husband to this appellant. The doctor did not find any injury on the body of the informant. The argument of the counsel for the appellant is that since the appellant went to demand the rest of the money, he has falsely been implicated in this case. We, prima facie, find some substance in her argument considering the evidence.

10. Considering the aforesaid facts, we are inclined to allow this interlocutory application. Accordingly, upon suspending the sentence, the appellant, above named,, is directed to be released on bail, during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Godda, in connection with SC/ST Act Case No. 22 of 2023, with a condition that the appellant shall appear and mark his attendance before the Registrar, Civil Court, Godda, once in every four months till the disposal of this appeal.

11. Accordingly, this interlocutory application stands allowed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Anu/-Cp-3