Jharkhand High Court
Tripurari Prasad Verma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 April, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 312 of 2025
With
I.A. No. 4221 of 2025
---------
Tripurari Prasad Verma ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
---------
For the Appellant : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P.
---------
02/23.04.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on
behalf of the Appellant challenging the judgment of
conviction dated 20.03.2025 and sentence dated
25.03.2025, passed by Shri Rajendra Kumar Sinha,
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III at Deoghar,
in Sessions Trial No. 93 of 2015, arising out of Jasidih
P.S. Case No.81 of 2011, by which the Appellant along
with another co-convict Arvind Kumar have been
convicted for the offences under Section 323/34,
341/34, 504/34, 326/34, of I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for Six (06) months, R.I. for one (01)
month and R.I. for One (01) year and R.I. for Five (05)
years respectively and also to pay the fine of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) .
2. The instant Interlocutory Application
has been filed under Section 430(1) of the BNSS, 2023
on behalf of the Appellant for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail during pendency of this Appeal.
3. Heard Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy,
learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Sardhu
Mahto, learned counsel for the State.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant has
submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction
and sentence passed by the learned Court below are
illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law.
It is submitted that the Appellant is alleged to have
instigated his son for firing at the Informant. It is
submitted that the Appellant is a very old person and
he is in custody since 20.03.2025. It is submitted that
earlier also the Appellant had remained in custody for
some period, hence he may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has
opposed the prayer for bail, however, learned A.P.P.
has fairly stated that the Appellant is about 92 years
old as it reveals from the judgment of the learned Trial
Court.
6. It appears from the impugned judgment
that the Appellant had instigated his son to fire at the
person, who was plucking Guava. It also reveals that
son of the Appellant had fired at the Informant,
namely Muneshwar Das, but it hit another person,
namely Haldhar Das causing firearm injury on his leg.
7. It also appears that the firing was done
by another co-convict, namely Arvind Kumar and the
Appellant is an aged person
8. Considering the age of the Appellant
and the facts and circumstances of the case, this
Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of the
Appellant.
9. Accordingly, the sentence awarded to
the Appellant, namely Tripurari Prasad Verma, is,
hereby suspended during pendency of this Criminal
Appeal and the Appellant, namely Tripurari Prasad
Verma is directed to be released on Bail, on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-III at Deoghar or His Successor Court in
connection with Sessions Trial No. 93 of 2015, arising
out of Jasidih P.S. Case No.81 of 2011 corresponding
to G.R. Case No.454 of 2011.
10. Thus, I.A. No. 4221 of 2025 is allowed
and stands disposed of.
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 312 of 2025
11. Admit.
12. Call for the legible scanned copy of the
Lower Court Record.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
s.m.
