Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Manu Hessa Son Of Raju Hessa vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 462 Jhar

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 462 Jhar
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

Manu Hessa Son Of Raju Hessa vs The State Of Jharkhand on 1 July, 2025

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Rajesh Kumar
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                    Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 183 of 2023
                                  ---------

1. Manu Hessa Son of Raju Hessa

2. Jagmohan Bandiyan son of Gala Bandiyan

3. Dularam Hembram Son of Sukhram Hembram

4. Pahalwan Hembram Son of Pandu Hembram age about 47 Years All are residents of Padampur P.O. Padampur P.S. Kharsawan District Seraikella Kharswan ... Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent

---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

----------

For the Appellant : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, APP

-----------

07/Dated: 1st July, 2025

I.A. No. 7871 of 2025:

1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 under Section 430(1) of the BNSS, 2023 for keeping the sentence in abeyance in connection with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.11.2022 and 19.11.2022, respectively passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella in connection with ST Case No. 245 of 2013 arising out of Seraikella P.S. Case No. 72 of 2012, whereby and whereunder, the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302 of IPC and has also been sentenced for other offences in different sections.

2. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 that earlier the prayer for suspension of

sentence has been rejected vide order dated 16th March, 2023 passed in I.A. No. 1473 of 2023 and the instant interlocutory application has been filed renewing the prayer for suspension of sentence on the ground that the appellants have completed the sentence of approx. 9 years and 2 months against the maximum punishment imposed for imprisonment of life.

3. It has also been contended that the co-convict, namely, Manu Hessa, has been directed to be released on bail after suspension of sentence by this Court vide order dated 19th June, 2025 in I.A. No. 7005 of 2025 (Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 183 of 2023).

4. While, on the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence, but he is fair enough to admit that the prayer for suspension of sentence of the co-convict has been considered by allowing the prayer on the ground of age and period of custody.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appreciated the submission made on behalf of the parties.

6. This Court, after takin into consideration that the appellants have completed about 9 years and 3 months of sentence against the maximum punishment for life as also that the prayer for suspension of sentence of the co-convict, namely Manu Hessa has been considered and the said prayer has been allowed by suspending the sentence vide order dated 19th June, 2025 passed in I.A. No. 7005 of 2025 (Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 183 of 2023), is of the view that the instant interlocutory application may be allowed.

7. Accordingly, I.A. No. 7871 of 2025 stands allowed.

8. In consequence thereof, the appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4, named above, are directed to be released on bail, during pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Seraikella in

connection with ST Case No. 245 of 2013 arising out of Seraikella P.S. Case No. 72 of 2012.

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

10. In view thereof, I.A. No. 7871 of 2025 stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

Samarth

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter