Jharkhand High Court
Madan Chandravanshi @ Madan Ram Age 60 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 27 February, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1147 of 2024
-------
Madan Chandravanshi @ Madan Ram age 60 years old, son of
Late Sita Ram, resident of village Sukhdana, P.O. & P.S. & Distrct
Garhwa.
... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
WITH
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1194 of 2024
-------
Md Asif @ Pintu Ansari @ age 30 years old son of Md Izhar,
resident of village Near Koyal River Pahari Mohalla, P.O. Hussain
Nagar, P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau.
... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
WITH
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1264 of 2024
-------
Sakil Ansari @ Sakil Ahmad @ Shakil Khan @ Sakil, aged about 60
years, son of Late Jalil Khan, resident of Village - Sonepurwa,
Alagdiha, P.O. & P.S. - Garhwa, District - Garhwa.
... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
-------
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate
[In Cr.A.(DB) No. 1147/2024 &
Cr. A.(DB) No. 1194/2024]
Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate
[In Cr.A.(DB) No. 1264/2024]
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.
[In Cr.A.(DB) No. 1147/2024]
Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P.
[In Cr. A.(DB) No. 1194/2024]
Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P.
[In Cr.A.(DB) No. 1264/2024]
-------
Order No.07/Dated- 27.02.2025
I.A. No.10583 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1147/2024,
I.A. No. 11285 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1194/2024 &
I.A. No. 1592 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1264/2024
1. All these interlocutory applications have been filed under
Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by
which these appellants-applicants have prayed for suspension of
sentence dated 16.08.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge,
Garhwa in Sessions Trial No.358 of 2022, arising out of Garhwa
P.S. Case No.329 of 2022 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.230 of
2023) whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been
convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section
302/34 of the I.P.C. along with fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in
default of payment of fine, further R.I. for six months each and
also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the
offence punishable under Section 120(B) of the I.P.C. along with
fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, further
R.I. for six months each .
2. It has been contended by learned counsel appearing for the
appellants-applicants that so far as the present applicants are
concerned, there is no specific overt, act even if the entire
testimony of the witnesses will be taken into consideration
together have been attributed.
3. It has been contended that the basis of conviction is the
statement given by the deceased prior to his death disclosing the
name of some of the persons particularly Shyamraj Sharma @
Pankaj Sharma, Anil Paswan @ Bhikhu Paswan and Anil Ram @
Deepak but so far as these appellants-applicants are concerned, no
reference of their names have been taken by the deceased,
however, they have been shown to be, as per the prosecution
version, at the place of occurrence. There is no culpability having
found against these three applicants, since nobody has come
forward to say regarding their involvement in the commission of
crime of murder of the deceased. The argument has been advanced
that it is a case where the fight between two groups and in course
thereof, when the murder of the deceased had been committed, the
crowd has assaulted the person who has given bullet injury upon
the deceased namely Santosh Chandravanshi who has died at the
spot.
4. Learned counsel, based upon the aforesaid ground, has further
submitted that it is, therefore, a fit case for suspension of sentence.
5. While on the other hand, Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Mr. Shiv
Shankar Kumar and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned counsel
appearing for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for
suspension of sentence.
6. It has been contended by referring to the testimonies together
of all the witnesses including the informant Vikesh Singh, who has
been examined as P.W.3 that these three appellants-applicants
were present at the place of occurrence and they have also
assaulted the deceased. Therefore, taking into consideration, their
presence at the place and having not denied the same, it is,
therefore, not a fit case for suspension of sentence.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the finding recorded by the learned court in the impugned
judgment as also the testimony of the witnesses available in the
trial court record and the other material exhibits as available
therein.
8. As per the prosecution version, which is admitted case of the
prosecution as it would be evident from the testimony available in
the trial court record which have been taken into consideration by
going through all the witnesses together that the assault by the
bullet has been given by one Santosh Chandravanshi that has been
disclosed by P.W.3, the informant, who has been told by the
deceased at the time when he was being carried to the RIMS for his
better treatment. It is also admitted from the testimony of P.W.3,
the applicants namely Mandra Chandravanshi @ Madan Ram, Md.
Asif @ Pintu Ansari @ Asif and Sakil Ansari @ Sakil Ahmad @
Shakil Khan @ Sakil, appellants in Cr.A.(DB) No. 1147 of 2024,
Cr.A.(DB) No. 1194 of 2024 and Cr.A.(DB) No. 1264 of 2024
respectively have been found too at the place of occurrence which
has also been deposed by him that these persons have assaulted
the deceased.
9. We have gone through the testimony of the doctor and found
that the death was due to the bullet assault. No other external
injury of assault has been found over the body of the deceased.
10. This Court considering the aforesaid fact is, therefore, of the
view that all the interlocutory applications i.e. I.A. No.10583 of 2024
in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1147/2024, I.A. No. 11285 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No.
1194/2024 & I.A. No. 1592 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1264/2024, are
fit to be allowed.
11. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory applications being I.A.
No.10583 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1147/2024, I.A. No. 11285 of
2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1194/2024 & I.A. No. 1592 of 2024 in Cr.
A.(DB) No. 1264/2024 stand allowed.
12. In consequence thereof, the appellants, above named, are
directed to be released on bail during pendency of the instant
appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Sessions Trial
No.358 of 2022, arising out of Garhwa P.S. Case No.329 of 2022
(corresponding to G.R. Case No.230 of 2023).
13. It is made clear that any observation made herein will not
prejudice the issue on merit as the appeals are lying pending for
their consideration.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Sachin-Sunil/
