Suraj Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1487 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Suraj Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 January, 2025

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
              Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 236 of 2023
                           --------

Suraj Kumar, aged about 21 years, Son of Heera Tanto, Resident of Village- Hariganwa, P.O. & P.S. - Kandi, Dist. - Garhwa, Jharkhand .. ... 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. Dharmendra Kr. Lalityar, Advocate Ms. Poonam Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, APP

--------

th Order No. 06/ Dated: 10 January, 2025 IA No.13789 of 2024

1. The said instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence in connection with S.T. Case No.332 of 2021 arising out of Kandi, P.S. Case No.68 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1639 of 2021 against the judgment of conviction dated 16.01.2023 and order of sentence dated 20.01.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life along with a fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the convict has been directed to undergo R.I. for six months. The period of detention already undergone directed to be set off.

2. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the sole ground agitated for suspension of sentence that appellant is remained in custody for about 3 years.

3. While on the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence on the ground that prayer for suspension of sentence has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2023 passed in I.A. No.5760 of 2023 by going through the testimony of PW-1, PW-2 & PW-4.

4. The learned State counsel has submitted that the only ground of custody of three years in a case of life imprisonment cannot be the basis of suspending sentence .

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. The prayer for suspension of sentence has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2023 passed in I.A. No.5760 of 2023 after taking into consideration the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2, PW-4 & PW-5. The ground has been agitated of three years custody but in a case of life imprisonment only on the basis of custody of three years, the sentence cannot be suspended that too once the prayer for suspension of sentence has already been rejected.

7. Considering the aforesaid grounds, the instant interlocutory application stands rejected and as such disposed of.

8. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove will not prejudice the case on merit, since, the criminal appeal is pending before this Court for its consideration.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Navneet Kumar, J.) Basant/ S. Das

2 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 236 of 2023