Jharkhand High Court
Santosh Paswan @ Santosh Kr. Paswan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 January, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 20 of 2018
------
Santosh Paswan @ Santosh Kr. Paswan .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sabyasachi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl. PP
------
10/Dated: 7 January, 2025
th
IA No. 13368 of 2024:
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430
of BNSS, 2023 for keeping the sentence in abeyance in connection
with the judgment of conviction dated 29.11.2017 and order of
sentence dated 04.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-XII, Ranchi in connection with Sessions Trial Case No.
705 of 2014 arising out of Burmu P.S. Case No. 46 of 2014
corresponding to GR Case No. 4414 of 2014, whereby and
whereunder, the appellant has been convicted with other co-accused
persons under section 364-A/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 15,000/- for the said offence
and in default of payment, further directed to undergo SI for six
months.
2. It has been submitted that identically placed convicts, namely, Rakesh
Pandey @ Rakesh Kr. Pandey @ Pappu Pandey has been enlarged on
bail vide order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 191 of
2018, Banta Paswan has been enlarged on bail vide order dated
05.01.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 344 of 2018, Surendra
Paswan has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 19.02.2024
passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 18 of 2018 and Lalan Paswan has been
enlarged on bail vide order dated 20.09.2024 in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.
17 of 2018 by different Benches of this Court.
3. It has been contended that the case of the present applicant is
identical to that of the other co-accused persons who have been
directed to be released on bail by different Benches of this Court,
therefore, it is a fit case where the present applicant be released from
judicial custody by suspending the sentence.
4. In addition to the aforesaid ground, the period of custody has also
been taken since the applicant has already remained in custody for
more than ten years i.e. from 14.08.2014.
5. While on the other hand, Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned Special Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence, but he has not
opposed the fact that the appellant has remained in judicial custody
since more than ten years and the aforesaid identical co-convicts
have been directed to be released on bail by the different Benches of
this Court.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across
the findings recorded by the different co-ordinate Benches of this
Court by which the identical co-convicts have been directed to be
released on bail by suspending their sentences.
7. This Court, after appreciating the argument advanced on behalf of
the parties has gathered therefrom that two grounds have been taken
on behalf of the appellant, first the ground of parity and another the
period of custody.
8. Hence, this Court is of the view that since the other co-accused
persons have been directed to be released on bail by the different
Benches of this Court, as also the applicant has already remained in
custody for more than ten years, as such, this Court is of the view
that the applicant has been able to make out a case for suspension of
sentence during the pendency of appeal.
9. Accordingly, IA No. 13368 of 2024 stands allowed.
10. In consenquence thereof, the applicant, named above, is directed to
be released on bail, during pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Ruppes Twenty-Five Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Judicial Commissioner-XII, Ranchi in connection with
Sessions Trial Case No. 705 of 2014 arising out of Burmu P.S. Case
No. 46 of 2014 corresponding to GR Case No. 4414 of 2014.
11. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove will not
prejudice the case on merit, since, the criminal appeal is lying
pending before this Court for its consideration.
12. In view thereof, IA No. 13368 of 2024 stands disposed of with the
aforesaid observation and direction.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
Samarth/
