Bipin Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1774 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Bipin Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 January, 2025

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Sanjay Prasad

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1540 of 2024
                               ....

Bipin Kumar                                                    .... Appellant
                        -Versus-
The State of Jharkhand                                         ... Respondent
                               .....
CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
                              -----
For the Appellants     : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mahtha, Advocate
For the State          : Mr. V.S. Sahay, A.P.P.
                         .....

Order No: 05/Dated: 16.01.2025
I.A. No.12273 of 2024

1. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430 (1) of

B.N.S.S, 2023 for suspension of sentence dated 05.10.2024 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bokaro in Sessions Trial Case No.302 of

2023 arising out of Chas P.S. Case No.140 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case

No. 743 of 2023, by which the appellant has been sentenced and directed to

undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence under

Section 302 of the I.P.C and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for one

year.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it is a case where

the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charge beyond reasonable

doubt which would be evident from the testimony of the witnesses if taken

together.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the other

witnesses have also not corroborated the prosecution version, as such, it is a fit

case where the sentence is to be suspended, during pendency of the instant

appeal.

4. While on the other hand, Mr. V. S Sahay, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence on the ground that the prosecution has fully been able

to prove the charge which would be evident from the testimony of the sons of

the appellant who are the eye witness of the occurrence and have been

examined as PW-2 and PW-3.

5. Learned State counsel, therefore, has submitted that when the sons of

the appellant have supported the prosecution version casting attributability

committed by their father, in that circumstances, it is incorrect on the part of

the appellant to take the ground that the prosecution has not been able to prove

the charge against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the

finding recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned judgment as also

the testimony available in the L.C.R.

7. This Court, on consideration of the testimony of PW-2 and PW-3 who

are the sons of the appellant and the eye witness of the alleged occurrence,

have supported the case of the prosecution version of killing of their mother

by their father i.e. the appellant, is of the view that it is not a fit case for

suspension of sentence, during pendency of appeal.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for suspension of sentence of the appellant is

rejected.

9. Accordingly, I.A. No. 12273 of 2024, is hereby dismissed.

10. However, it is made clear that any observation made herein will not

prejudice the case on merit as the appeal is lying pending for its consideration.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) Avinash/Nishant