Kartik Pandit vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9263 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Kartik Pandit vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 September, 2024

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Subhash Chand

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1325 of 2023
       Kartik Pandit, aged about 35 years, Son of Sahdeo Pandit,
       Resident of Village-Malhara, P.O. Sarounibazar, P.S. Godda
       (Muffasil), District-Godda           ....        .... Appellant
                             Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                ....       .... Respondent
                            With
                  Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1293 of 2023
       1. Sahdeo Pandit, Aged about 80 years, son of Late Madhay
          Pandit,
       2. Ram Kumar Pandit, Aged about 30 years, Son of Sahdeo
          Pandit.
          Both are Resident of Village-Malhara, P.O. Sarounibazar,
          P.S. Godda (Muffasil), District-Godda       .... Appellants
                            Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                ....       .... Respondent
                            --------
       CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI SUBHASH CHAND, J.

For the Appellants : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. : Mr. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P.

--------

07/13.09.2024:

I.A.No. 9350 of 2024 in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1325/2023

This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the

appellant-Kartik Pandit praying therein to suspend the

sentence and release him on bail during the pendency of this

appeal.

2. The appellant-Kartik Pandit has been convicted and

sentenced in connection with S.T. No. 138 of 2022, arising out

of Godda (Mufassil) P.S. Case No. 20 of 2020, for the offence

under Sections 323/34 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 307 of the I.P.C. amongst other

sentences.

3. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and learned

A.P.P. for the State and have gone through the impugned

Judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

4. The prayer for suspension of sentence of the appellant

has been earlier rejected on 05.03.2024 by a reasoned order

with a finding that this appellant gave blow on the head of the

injured with 'Garasa'.

5. There is no fresh ground to reconsider the same.

6. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

7. It will be open to the appellant to pray for early hearing.

(Ananda Sen, J.)

(Subhash Chand, J.) P.K.S.