[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Kamrul Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 December, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No. 496 of 2023
Kamrul Ansari, aged about 40 years, son of Tafjul Ansari, resident of
Village- Padyia Tola, Kolharia, P.O. & P.S. Taratand, Dist. Giridih
... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Maniruddin Ansari, S/o Late Ibrahim Ansari, R/o Village- Baghadih, P.O.
& P.S. Ahilyapur, District- Giridih ... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. B.N. Ojha, Spl.P.P.
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Avishek Chandra, Advocate
-----
08/15.12.2025 I.A. No.6983 of 2024
I.A. No.6983 of 2024 has been filed for condoning the delay of 1252
days in filing the present criminal revision petition.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years
and fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal
Code, R.I. for five years and a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section
326 of the Indian Penal Code and S.I. for six months for the offence under
Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine,
further direction is there to undergo R.I. for one year and there is also
direction that all the sentences will run concurrently by the judgment dated
31.01.2013 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge 1st, Giridih in S.T.
No.260/2010 arising out of Taratand P.S. Case No.14/2010, corresponding to
G.R. No.977/2010. He further submits that the said judgment was affirmed
by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Criminal
Appeal No.07/2013, vide judgment dated 31.08.2017. He then submits that
the petitioner is still in custody and he has not been able to depute any
person to take steps on his behalf to file criminal revision and in view of that,
such delay has occurred.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the State and opposite party no.2
oppose the prayer and submit that there is no explanation of delay in the
said I.A. and in view of that, the delay may not be condoned.
-1- Criminal Revision No. 496 of 2023
4. Considering that the petitioner is still in custody and it has been pointed
out that he has not been able to depute anybody to take steps on his behalf
to file the criminal revision petition and in view of that, the delay of 1252
days in filing the present criminal revision petition is, hereby, condoned.
5. Accordingly, I.A. No.6983 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.
6. I.A. No.3923 of 2025 has been filed for suspension of sentence during
pendency of this criminal revision petition.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has remained in custody during trial w.e.f. 02.05.2010 to
12.05.2011 and after conviction from 31.01.2013 to 22.04.2013
and, thereafter, from 18.10.2021 to till date. He submits that the petitioner
has remained in custody for about 5 ½ years, whereas, maximum sentence
is of seven years. He next submits that P.W.1 is the victim herself, P.W.2 is
the daughter of the victim, P.W. 3 is the Doctor, P.W.4 is the informant, who
is father of the victim and P.W.5 is the I.O. of the present case. He then
submits that so far as P.Ws. 6 and 7 are concerned, they have been declared
hostile. He also submits that there is no independent witness and all family
members and doctor and I.O. have been made witnesses and on the basis
of their statements, sentence has been awarded upon the petitioner. He next
submits that P.W.4 has deposed before the learned Court that the villagers
had informed about the alleged occurrence, however, no villagers have been
examined on behalf of the prosecution.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the State and opposite party no.2
oppose the prayer and submit that two Courts' concurrent findings are there
and in view of that, the prayer for suspension of sentence may kindly be
rejected.
9. Considering that petitioner has remained in custody during trial
w.e.f. 02.05.2010 to 12.05.2011 and after conviction from 31.01.2013 to
22.04.2013 and, thereafter, from 18.10.2021 to till date and he has
remained in custody for about 5 ½ years, whereas, maximum sentence is of
seven years and this criminal revision is still pending and there is no
likelihood of taking this criminal revision petition for final hearing recently
-2- Criminal Revision No. 496 of 2023
and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to
suspend the sentence and grant bail to the petitioner.
10. Accordingly, during the pendency of this criminal revision petitioner,
the petitioner above-named is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Assistant Sessions
Judge, 1st, Giridih or successor Court in connection with S.T. No.260 of 2010,
arising out of Taratand P.S. Case No.14/2010, corresponding to G.R.
No.977/2010.
11. Accordingly, I.A. No.3923 of 2025 is allowed and disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Dated: 15th December, 2025
Ajay/
-3- Criminal Revision No. 496 of 2023
