Ravi Ray vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2871 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ravi Ray vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 February, 2025

Author: Sanjay Prasad

Bench: Sanjay Prasad

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                Cr. Rev. No.1162 of 2023
                         ....

Ravi Ray, aged about 57 years, Son of Late Devendra Kumar Verma, Resident of Gangotri Nagar, P.O. and P.S.-Chakrdharpur, District-West Singhbhum ......Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Sravan Gupta Proprietor of M/s Apex Enterprises S/o Suresh Prasad Gupta, R/o Pande Hata, Ward No.02, P.O.+P.S.-Chaibasa, Dist-West Singbhum ......Opp. Parties

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P ......

Order No.15/25.02.2025 I.A. No.7879 of 2024 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 29.05.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.88 of 2022 by Sri Kalpana Hazarika, learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgement of conviction order of sentence dated 08.09.2022 passed by Sri Milan Kumar, learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Civil Court, Chaibasa in G.R. Case No.332 of 2007 T.R. Case No.12 of 2022 arising out of C/1 Case No.29 of 2007 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Section 420 and 465 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for three years and S.I. for two years respectively and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-.

2. I.A. No. 7879 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail to the petitioner, during pendency of the present Criminal Revision Application.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned judgments and sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioner was the employee of the Informant i.e. O.P. No.2 and the allegation against the petitioner are false and concocted.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready to deposit demand draft Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) without prejudice to this case in the name of the Opposite Party No.2 in the Office of learned Registrar General and as such he may be enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P. P has submitted that this is a case of cheating of amount of Rs.8,88,000/-(Eight Lakh Eighty Eight thousand).

6. It is submitted that the prayer for bail may be rejected. It appears that in pursuant to order dated 24.01.2025, passed by this Court notice was sent upon the O.P. No.2 but undelivered registered cover of notice has returned unserved with the endorsement "insufficient address".

7. It appears that the petitioner was the employee of the Opposite Party No.2. and the petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2024.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also the custody of the petitioner, the petitioner namely Ravi Ray is directed to be released on Provisional Bail of six (06) months, on furnishing of bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri Milan Kumar, Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa / or his Successor Court in connection with G.R. Case No.332 of 2007, T.R. Case No.12 of 2022 and one bailor should be own relative of

the petitioner subject to the condition that the Petitioner shall deposit Demand Draft of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) in the name of the Opposite party No.2 in the Office of learned Registrar General without prejudice to his case, on or before 7th March 2025 and shall file an affidavit in this regard.

9. Thus, I.A. No. 7879 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.