Shivam Pandey vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1597 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Shivam Pandey vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 August, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1002 of 2023
                                   ------
      Shivam Pandey, S/o Om Prakash Pandey, R/o Kund Muhalla, P.O.
      Daltonganj, P.S. Town Daltonganj, District Palamau.
                                                          ... ... Appellant
                                     Versus
      The State of Jharkhand.                          ... ... Respondent
                                ------
            CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

For the Appellant : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Navneet Sahay, Advocate Mr. Govind Ray Karan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. A.K. Verma, Advocate Mr. S. Sodhani, Advocate

------

07/ 06.08.2025

This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the

appellant praying therein to suspend the sentence and release him

on bail during pendency of this appeal.

2. It is the second attempt of the appellant praying to

release him on bail after suspension of sentence. Earlier his

application for suspension of sentence was dismissed vide order

dated 08.07.2024 passed in I.A. No.972 of 2024.

3. The appellant has been convicted in connection with S.T.

Case No.36 of 2022 in the Court of Special Judge, Children's Court,

Palamau at Daltonganj, for offences under Sections 302, 379 and

411 IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment

for life with fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 302 IPC, and other

sentences for other offences.

4. Heard, learned counsel representing the appellant,

learned A.P.P. representing the State and learned counsel

representing the informant, and have gone through the impugned

judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

5. Opportunity was given to the State and the informant to

oppose the bail, which they availed and opposed.

6. We find no further grounds to reconsider our decision, as

there are sufficient materials against this appellant. Thus, we are not

inclined to allow this application.

7. This interlocutory application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Prashant. Cp-3