Jharkhand High Court
Ishwar Chandra Jha S/O Sanjay Jha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 January, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.90 of 2022
....
Ishwar Chandra Jha S/o Sanjay Jha, Age- about 28 years resident
of village- Nurpur, P.O.&P.S.-Masudanpur, Dist Bhagalpur
(Bihar)
......Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ......Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P
......
Order No.11/28.01.2025
I.A. No.299 of 2025
Heard Mr. A.K. Kashyap learned Senior counsel for the
appellant and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned APP.
2. The present Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.90 of 2022 has
been filed on behalf of the appellant against the judgment of
conviction dated 18.01.2022 and sentence dated 24.01.2022 passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Deoghar in N.D.P.S
Case No.04/2015 by which, the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-III, Deoghar has held the appellant guilty for the offence
under Section 20(b)(ii)B of NDPS Act and sentenced him to
undergo Rigorous imprisonment of a period of six (06) years and
to pay the fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) for the offence
under Sections 20(b)(ii)B of N.D.P.S. Act.
3. I.A. No. 299 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the
appellant under Section 430(1) of BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail
during pendency of this Criminal Appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
impugned judgment and sentence passed by the learned Court
below are illegal and not sustainable in eye of law.
5. It is submitted that the appellant had earlier moved for
bail before this Court, and the bail of the appellant was rejected
thrice earlier vide order dated 11.05.2022, vide order dated
23.06.2022 and vide order dated 16.02.2024 passed by this Court.
It is submitted that there is alleged recovery of 71.500 kg Ganja
from the appellant.
It is submitted that the co-accused Ramesh Sah has been
enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Justice Subhash
Chand as then his Lordship was) of this Court video order dated
02.08.2023 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.256 of 2023
(I.A.(Cr.) No.5946 of 2023).
It is submitted that another co-accused Vibhishan Kumar
@ Vibhishan Sah enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate
Bench (Justice Ratnaker Bhengra as then his lordship was) of this
Court vide order dated 12.09.2023 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No.259 of 2023 (I.A. No. 6981 of 2023).
It is further submitted that another co-accused Deepak
Kumar Raj @ Deepak Sah @ Deepak Kumar Sah @ Raj has been
enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Ratnaker
Bhengra as then his lordship was) of this Court vide order dated
12.09.2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 261 of 2023 (I.A. No. 6982 of
2023) who was arrested along with the accused in same
transaction.
6. It is further submitted that the appellant has no criminal
antecedent and the appellant has completed half of the sentence.
It is further submitted that the appellant had remained in custody
during trial from 08.06.2015 and 24.08.2015 i.e. for two and half
months and after conviction he is in custody from 18.01.2022 till
today i.e. 28.01.2025 that is more than three years. Thus, the
appellant has completed more than three years and two and half
months out of sentence of six years. It is submitted that the
appellant has completed half of the custody and hence he may be
enlarged on bail.
7. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer
for bail. It is submitted that there is recovery of 71.500 kg of ganja
and earlier also the prayer for bail was rejected thrice on vide order
dated 11.05.2022, on vide order dated 23.06.2022 and vide order
dated 16.02.2024 by this Court, and there is no fresh grounds for
bail and hence, the prayer for the bail may be rejected.
8. Perused the records of this case and considered the
submission of both the sides.
9. It appears that the appellant was arrested on the spot with
71.500 kg of Ganja and six different bags containing 50 packets
has been recovered from the possession of the appellant.
10. It appears that the bail for the appellant was earlier
rejected thrice by this Court and lastly it was rejected on
16.02.2024 with certain observations.
11. It further appears that co-accused persons Ramesh Sah,
Vibhishan Kumar @ Vibhishan Sah and Deepak Kumar Raj @
Deepak Sah @ Deepak Kumar Sah @ Raj have also already been
enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.08.2023, 12.09.2023 and
12.09.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.256 of 2023,
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.259 of 2023 and Criminal Appeal (S.J.)
No.261 of 2023 respectively by the Co-ordinate Bench as
mentioned above.
12. Considering, the custody of the appellant and, on the facts
and in the circumstances of this case and also considering the fact
of all three accused persons namely Ramesh Sah, Vibhishan
Kumar @ Vibhishan Sah and Deepak Kumar Raj @ Deepak Sah
@ Deepak Kumar Sah @ Raj who had faced separated trial, but
who were apprehended in the same transaction along with the
appellant, have been enlarged on bail, the appellant namely Ishwar
Chandra Jha is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Smt.
Garima Mishra, learned Addl. Session Judge III, Deoghar or her
Successor Court in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 04 of 2015
corresponding to Rail Jasidih P.S. Case No.43 of 2015 subject to
the condition that one of the bailors must be the own relative of the
appellant and subject to filing of the Undertaking that the appellant
will not indulge in such types of crime in future, failing which the
prosecution will be at liberty to take step for cancellation of bail of
the appellant.
13. Thus, I.A. No. 299 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed
of.
14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below
and Office of Superintendent of Police, Deoghar and also to the
Director General of Police, Jharkhand
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Nishant/-
