Jharkhand High Court
Raju Ravidas @ Ravi Das Aged About 45 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 January, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Revision No.1121 of 2022
------
Raju Ravidas @ Ravi Das aged about 45 years, S/o Surendra
Das, resident of Jairam Nagar, P.O.- Giridih, P.S.- Mufasil,
District- Giridih (Jharkhand) .... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Union of India through RPF, Madhupur
.... .... .... Opposite Parties
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pankaj Mishra, A.P.P
For the UOI : Mr. Ravi Prakash, C.G.C
------
Order No.21 Dated- 22-01-2025
I.A. No. 7737 of 2024
This Criminal Revision Application has
been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging
the judgment dated 08.08.2022 passed by Sri
Shyam Nandan Tiwari, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur in Criminal Appeal
No. 53 of 2017 by which the appeal filed on
behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed
thereby affirming the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 12.07.2017 passed
by Sri Neeraj Kumar, learned Railway
Magistrate, Madhupur in G.O.C.R. Case No.
32/2012 (T.R 148/2017) by which the petitioner
has been convicted for the offence under section
3(a) of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession)
Act (in short R.P.U.P. Act) and had been
sentenced to undergo R.I for two years with fine
of Rs.3,000/-.
2. The Interlocutory Application No. 7737
of 2024 has been filed Under Section 389(1) of
Criminal Procedure Code on behalf of the
petitioner for suspension of sentence and for
grant of bail to the petitioner, during pendency
of the present Criminal Revision Application.
3. Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned Senior
Counsel assisted by Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal,
learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ravi
Prakash, learned counsel for the Union of India
and Mr. Pankaj Mishra, learned APP on behalf
of the State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that impugned judgments and
sentence passed by the learned Courts below are
illegal and not sustainable in law. It is submitted
that the alleged recovery of railway scraps are
not the property of Indian Railway. It is
submitted that the petitioner has surrendered on
19.07.2024 in the light of order passed by the co-
ordinate Bench and hence he may be enlarged
on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for
the State has raised objection.
6. The learned counsel for the Union of
India i.e. O. P. No. 2 submitted that there is
recovery of stolen properties of Indian Railways
from the godown of this petitioner. It is
submitted that the petitioner has got three
criminal antecedent bearing case nos. 09/2001,
03/2004 and 05/2004 under Section 3(a) RP (UP)
Act. It is submitted that there is an expert
opinion also and which reveals that the
properties recovered from the godown of the
petitioner are the property of the Indian
Railways. Hence, the prayer for bail may be
rejected.
7. Having heard learned counsel for both
the sides, it appears that several Railway articles
are alleged to have been recovered from the
godown of the petitioner. However, the
petitioner has also raised dispute over the
properties in question which is contradicted by
the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
O. P. No. 2.
8. Considering the fact that the petitioner
is in custody since 19.07.2024 and he had
surrendered in the light of order dated
05.07.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court ( Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar
Choudhary), the petitioner namely Raju Ravidas
@ Ravi Das is directed to be released on bail, on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten
thousand only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Railway J.M. 1st Class, Madhupur, Deoghar/ or
his Successor Court in connection with
R.P.F./Post/Madhupur Case No.01/2012,
corresponding to G.O.C.R. Case No. 32/2012
(T.R. 148/2017), subject to the condition that one
of the bailors must be the own relative of the
petitioner and petitioner shall file an
undertaking not to indulge such crime in future
again, failing which the prosecution will be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail.
9. Thus, I.A. No. 7737 of 2024 is allowed
and stands disposed of.
Criminal Revision No.1121 of 2022
10. Admit.
11. Lower Court Records has already been
received.
12. Put up this case after six weeks.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
RKM/
