Jharkhand High Court
Betka Hembrom vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 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. 987 of 2024
--------
Betka Hembrom, aged about 40 years, Son of - Late Sankhai Hembrom,
Resident of Village- Paraspani, Post Office and Police Station -
Tinpahar, District- Sahibganj.
.. ... 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. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, APP
--------
st
Order No. 03/ Dated: 21 January, 2025
IA No.600 of 2025
This instant interlocutory application has been filed for suspension
of sentence against the Judgment of conviction dated 10.06.2024 and
order of sentence dated 15.06.2024 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-1, Rajmahal, in connection with Sessions Trial No.165 of
2018 arising out of Tinpahar, P.S. Case No.08 of 2018, corresponding to
G.R. Case No.176 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the appellant has
been convicted under Sections 304 (Part-II) of IPC and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, further sentenced to undergo S.I. for 06 months.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant
has already completed more than half of the sentences since he has
remained in judicial custody for a period of 06 years 03 months and 05
days at the time of order of pronouncement of sentence and till today his
actual custody period is 06 years, 10 months and 11 days.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant based upon the aforesaid
grounds has submitted that the appeal is since of the year 2024 and there
is no likelihood to take up the matter in near future and the appellant has
already completed more than half of the sentences and therefore it is a fit
case for suspension of sentence.
4. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer
for suspension of sentence so far as the issue on merit is concerned he is
fair enough to admit the fact that the appellant has completed more than
half of the sentence.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the
submission made on their behalf.
6. The argument which has been advanced by the appellant that he
has already remained in custody for more than half of the sentence has
been admitted by the learned State Counsel. Since, the appellant has
completed the actual sentence i.e. 06 years 10 months, 11 days without
remission and the appeal is of the year 2024 and there is no likelihood to
take up the matter in near future.
7. This Court considering the aforesaid fact is of the view that it is a
fit case where the sentence of the present appellant needs to be
suspended.
8. Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application stands allowed.
9. In consequence, thereof, the appellant, named above, is directed
to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Rajmahal, in
connection with Sessions Trial No.165 of 2018 arising out of Tinpahar,
P.S. Case No.08 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No.176 of 2018.
10. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application being I.A.
No.600 of 2025 stands disposed of.
11. 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. 987 of 2024
