Jharkhand High Court
Ganesh Ram Paswan vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 March, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 110 of 2022
Ganesh Ram Paswan , aged about 58 years , son of Late Lalman
Paswan, Resident of Village- Tilaiya , Post Office-Maheshra
Police Station: Daru, District - Hazaribag ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Bhuneshwar Narayan @ Bhuneshwar Paswan , son of Hari
Narayan Mahto, Resident of Village- Tilaiya, Post Office -
Maheshra, Police Station : Daru, District - Hazaribagh ( due
to inadvertence name of opposite party No.-2 has wrongly
been mentioned in impugned order as Bhuneshwar Paswan)
...... Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. P.D. Agarwal, Spl.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Imran Ansari, Advocate
.....
Order No. 15/ Dated:17.03.2025
This Criminal Revision has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 27.02.2019 passed
in Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 2018 by Sri Kaushal Kishore Jha,
learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV- Gumla by which learned
Additional Sessions Judge-III, Hazaribag has dismissed the appeal
filed by the petitioner by affirming the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 17.03.2018 passed by Sri Yogesh
Kumar Singh, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class,
Hazaribagh in Complaint Case No. 271 of 2016 , T.R. No. 389 of
2018 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offences
under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to
undergo S.I. for one year and to pay the fine of Rs. 4,00,000/-
including cheque amount (three lacs) as compensation .
2. I.A. No. 522 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail, during pendency of the present
Criminal Revision Application .
3. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that initially the petitioner could not complied with the order dated
11.10.2022 passed by this Court by depositing the amount of
Rs. 50,000/- in favour of the O.P. No. 2 and the petitioner is not in
position to pay the amount Rs. 2,50,000/- to the O.P. No. 2 and the
petitioner wants to contest the case on merit. However, the
petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 50,000/- by way of Demand Draft in
the name of O.P. No. 2 for the present in compliance of the order
dated 11.10.2022 passed by this Court. It is submitted that the
petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2024 and hence, the petitioner
may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned Special P.P. appearing for
the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the
petitioner has not complied with the order dated 11.10.2022 till
date.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the O.P.
No. 2 has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the
petitioner has not complied with the order dated 11.10.2022 passed
by this Court and hence, the prayer of the bail of the petitioner may
be rejected.
However the petitioner may get deposited the amount of
Rs. 50,000/- before the learned Court below.
7. Perused the F.I.R and considered the submission of both
the sides.
8. It appears that initially the petitioner was granted
Provisional Bail by this Court vide order dated 11.10.2022 as the
earlier learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this
Court that the petitioner is ready to pay sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the
O.P. No. 2 at the time of furnishing bail bonds and also ready to
pay remaining amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the O.P. No. 2 within
one year.
It also appears that the petitioner had shown willingness
to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the O.P. No. 2
within one year but the petitioner has not complied with the said
order.
9. It appears that the petitioner was granted Provisional Bail
for six (06) months vide order dated 11.10.2022 passed by this
Court .
10. However, after being released from Jail, the petitioner
could not deposit Rs. 50,000/- and had not take any step.
11. It also appears that vide order dated 17.02.2024 passed
by the Co-ordinate Bench ( Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat
Choudhary) of this Court the instant Criminal Revision No. 110 of
2022 was dismissed because none had appeared on behalf of the
petitioner.
12. Thereafter the above Criminal Revision was dismissed
for default vide order dated 17.02.2024 by the Co-ordinate Bench
(Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary ) . Thereafter this
Criminal Revision is restored vide order dated 03.01.2025 in
Cr.M.P. No. 3372 of 2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench
( Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary ) which was
subsequently rectified and the date of order is directed to be read as
"3rd January 2025" instead of " 3rd January , 2024" vide order dated
08.01.2025.
13. The petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2024.
14. Today the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced
the Demand Draft of Rs. 50,000/- before this Court . However the
learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 is not willing to accept the same.
15. It appears that the petitioner is unable to pay the amount
in question but he remained in custody for around three (03) months
and earlier also is remained in custody for around one month
16. Considering the facts in the circumstances of the case
and considering the period of custody of the petitioner, namely
Ganesh Ram Paswan is directed to be released on bail, on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh the
learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Hazaribagh or His Successor
Court in Complaint Case No. 271 of 2016 , T.R. No. 389 of 2018
subject to the condition that petitioner shall deposit the Demand
Draft of Rs. 50,000/- in the name of the O.P. No. 2 at the time of
furnish the bail bonds and one of the bailors should be the relative
of the petitioner.
17. The learned Trial Court is directed to hand over the
Demand Draft of Rs. 50,000/- to the O.P. No. 2 on filing proper
application by the O.P. No. 2 in presence of learned counsel for the
O.P. No. 2, if such an application is filed.
18 . Thus, I.A. No. 522 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed
of.
19. Put up this case on 12.06.2025 for "Admission".
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Bibha/
