Jharkhand High Court
Dilip Kumar @ Ravi Kumar Aged About 23 ... vs State Of Jharkhand on 20 March, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Gautam Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1306 of 2024
With
I.A. No. 2950 of 2025
---------
1. Dilip Kumar @ Ravi Kumar aged about 23 years, Son of Ishwari
Prasad @ Ishwari Yadav, Resident of Village - Tilaiya, P.O. -
Barachatti and P.S. - Dhangai, District - Gaya, State - Bihar.
2. Upendra Kumar, aged about 26 years, Son of Chandradeo Yadav,
Resident of Village - Tilaiya, P.O. - Barachatti and P.S. - Dhangai,
District - Gaya, State - Bihar.
... ... Appellants
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
----------
For the Appellant No.2 : Mr. Ayush Kr. Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P.
-----------
th
05/Dated: 20 March, 2025
I.A. No. 2950 of 2023:
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of
appellant No.2 viz. Upendra Kumar under Section 430(1) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of
sentence dated 30.08.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge (NDPS Act), Chatra in connection with N.D.P.S. Case
No.133 of 2022, arising out of Rajpur P.S. Case No.24 of 2022
whereby and whereunder, the appellant No.2 has been convicted for
the offence under Section 18 of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for 10 years with fine of
Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for one
year.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant no.2 that there is no
recovery from the physical possession of the present appellant since
the recovery has been made from the house of one Gendlal Singh,
co-accused.
3. It has been contended that save and except the confessional
statement of the co-accused before the police, no other material has
been brought on record to connect the appellant no.2 with the
contraband.
4. It has been contended that the identically placed co-accused person,
namely, Dilip Kumar @ Ravi Kumar has already been enlarged on
bail during pendency of the appeal by this Court vide order dated
24.02.2025 passed in I.A. No. 12532 of 2024 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.
1306 of 2024].
5. While, on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the
prayer for suspension of sentence but he is fair enough to not dispute
the fact regarding bail having been granted during pendency of the
appeal in favour of one co-accused person, namely, Dilip Kumar @
Ravi Kumar.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the finding recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned
judgment as also the testimony available in the trial court record and
the exhibit available therein.
7. This Court taking into consideration that the appellant no.2 is in
custody since 15.04.2022 and the identically placed co-convict,
namely, Dilip Kumar @ Ravi Kumar has been enlarged on bail
during pendency of the appeal vide order dated 25.02.2025 passed in
I.A. No. 12532 of 2024 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1306 of 2024], as
such, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to take distinct
view with respect to the appellant no.2.
8. Accordingly, the instant Interlocutory Application stands allowed.
9. In view thereof, the appellant no.2, namely, Upendra Kumar, is
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
(NDPS Act), Chatra in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.133 of
2022, arising out of Rajpur P.S. Case No.24 of 2022.
10. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove will not
prejudice the case of the parties on merit since the appeal is lying
pending for its consideration.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Saurabh/-
