Jharkhand High Court
Md. Ayub Alam vs State Of Jharkhand on 5 March, 2025
Author: Navneet Kumar
Bench: Navneet Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 766 of 2024
1.Md. Ayub Alam, aged about 29 years son of Md. Qayum Ansari
2.Md. Gulam Khawaja @ Gulam Khawaja aged about 24 years son of Mahrum
Mustakim Ansari
3.Md. Salahuddin Ansari, aged about 48 years Son of - Late Md. Mahmood
Mian
4.Md. Nasir Ahmad @ Nasir Ahmad, aged about 24 years Son- Md. Basir Mian
5.Md. Nazim Alam, aged about 23 years S/o- Md. Nejamuddin Ansari
All R/o Vill- Mohammadabad P.O. and P.S.- Hussainabad, District- Palamau
--- --- Appellants
Versus
State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P.
I.A. No. 992 of 2025
06/05.03.2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.P.P.
representing the State.
2. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for
suspension of sentence of the appellant no.3 Md. Salahuddin Ansari
by enlarging him on bail during pendency of the instant criminal
appeal, which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction
dated 13.08.2024 and order of sentence dated 17.08.2024 passed in
S.T. Case No. 230 of 2019 arising out of Hussainabad P.S. Case No.
178 of 2017 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau at
Daltonganj whereby the appellant no.3 along with other appellants has
been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 147, 307/149
& 506/149 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1
years u/s 147 IPC; R.I. for 7 years with a fine of Rs.10,000 u/s
307/149 IPC and R.I. for 1 year u/s 506/149 IPC with a default
sentence of S.I. for 6 months.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the maximum
sentence awarded to the appellant no.3 is 7 years and this appellant is
in custody since 13.08.2024 as on date. Further, it has been pointed
out that it is an admitted case of the prosecution that there is a case
and counter case between the parties and free fight took place between
them and person from both the parties sustained injury, which is
evident from para 25 of the impugned judgment.
4. It has further been submitted that the entire allegation alleged
against the appellant no.3 are general and omnibus and no specific
overt act has been attributed against him. It has further been pointed
out that all the injuries sustained by injured persons are simple in
nature and therefore intention and knowledge to commit attempt to
murder is not substantiated. In this view of the matter, it is urged that
the appellant no.3 may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the
State has opposed the contentions raised by the appellant but did not
controvert the fact that there is no specific allegation against the
appellant no.3 of any overt act and there is a case and counter case
between both the parties and injury has been sustained by people from
both the parties.
6. Heard the parties, perused the record of the case including the
trial court record, depositions of witnesses and other exhibits.
7. In view of the persuasive submission advanced by the learned
counsel for the appellant, it is found just and proper to enlarge the
appellant on bail.
8. Accordingly, the appellant no.3 Md. Salahuddin Ansari is directed
to be released on bail on furnishing of 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-III, Palamau at
Daltonganj in connection with S.T. Case No. 230 of 2019 arising out of
Hussinabad P.S. Case No. 178 of 2017.
9. I.A. No. 992 of 2025 is allowed.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
A.Mohanty
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 766 of 2024
