Candrakant Sah @ Chandrakant Saha vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9281 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Candrakant Sah @ Chandrakant Saha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 September, 2024

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.340 of 2024
                                   -----
           Candrakant Sah @ Chandrakant Saha, aged about 28 years, son of
           Manoj Sah, resident of village Chowkidhab, Post Office and Police
           Station Radhanagar, District Sahibganj        ... Appellant(s).
                                   Versus
           The State of Jharkhand                        ... Respondent(s).
                                   ......

           CORAM       :       SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

            For the Appellant(s)    : Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate
            For the State           : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, PP
                                    .........
07 /17.09.2024: I.A. No.8673 of 2024

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.

2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 498A and 304B of IPC in connection with Sessions Trial Case No.19 of 2019. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years with fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence under Sections 498A of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under section 304B of IPC.

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

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

5. Wife of this appellant was killed within two months from date of the marriage. PW1 stated that there was demand of dowry. PW1 is none else but cousin brother of the deceased. Though, PW5 who is the informant has been declared hostile but we find no material to prima-facie disbelieve PW1. The dead body was found in the house of the appellant. The defence has put up a story that some person entered his house and assaulted

him and his wife and committed the murder. In support of which he has relied upon the evidence of the doctor who had examined this appellant who was suffering from some lacerated wound on the forehead and finger but the fact remains that no one had heard any human cry and not even seen anyone in the house of the appellant committing the offence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to grant bail to this appellant.

7. I.A. No.8673 of 2024 stands dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Tanuj/-