Kamlu Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1508 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Kamlu Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 August, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1516 of 2023
                                     -----
            1.Kamlu Munda, S/o Somra Munda
            2.Phool Kumari Dhan, W/o Late Sanika Dhan
            Both R/o Vill Mutpa, P.S.+P.S. Karra, Dist Khunti
                                                        ... Appellant(s).
                                     Versus
            The State of Jharkhand                      ... Respondent(s).

            CORAM       :      SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

            For the Appellant(s)    : Ms. Tejaswi, Advocate (through VC)
            For the State           : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
                                    .........
07 /04.08.2025: I.A. No.1266 of 2025

This interlocutory application has been filed by the appellants, praying therein to suspend the sentence and release them on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

2. This is appellant second attempt to renew his prayer for suspension of sentence and release on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

3. The interlocutory application for suspension of sentence of these appellants was earlier dismissed on 29.07.2024.

4. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced in connection with in Sessions Trial No.182 of 2019, arising out of Karra P.S. Case No.49 of 2019, for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 302/34 of IPC along with other sentences.

5. 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.

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

7. From the evidence, we find that though this case is based on circumstantial evidence yet the circumstances are strong. On the confessional statement of these appellants, the dead body was recovered and the murder weapon was also recovered. These facts were considered while rejecting the earlier bail application. We find no fresh ground to entertain this application, the same is dismissed.

8. Liberty is reserved to the appellants to pray for early hearing of the criminal appeal.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) R.S.