[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Shankar Bhuiyan @ Shankar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 January, 2026
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 195 of 2025
Shankar Bhuiyan @ Shankar ...... Appellant
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Sankari Devi ....... Respondents
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
----------
For the Appellant : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, APP
-----------
ORAL ORDER IN COURT
05/Dated: 05th January, 2026
I.A. No.13051 of 2025
This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the
appellant namely, Shankar Bhuiyan @ Shankar challenging the
judgment of conviction dated 21.01.2025 and Sentence dated
23.01.2025 passed by Sri Surya Mani Tripathi, learned
Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-F.T.C (C.A.W), Bermo
Tenughat, Bokaro in connection with S.T. No.453 of 2022,
arising out of Bermo P.S. Case No.65 of 2022 (corresponding to
G.R No.521 of 2022) by which the appellant has been convicted
for the offence under Section 306 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo R.I for five (05) years and to pay the fine of
Rs.10,000/-.
2. The appellant has filed the instant I.A. No.13051 of 2025
for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail, during
pendency of the appeal, in the light of order dated 17.06.2025
passed by this Court by which the prayer for bail of the
appellant was earlier rejected with the observations to renew
the prayer for bail after six months.
3. Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellant and learned APP for the State.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
impugned judgment and sentence passed by the learned Court
below is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law.
However, it is further submitted that the appellant is pursuing
this appeal for grant of bail after expiry of period of six (06)
months in the light of order dated 17.06.2025 passed by this
Court. It is submitted that the deceased had allegedly
committed theft in the shop of the appellant and for which the
appellant had scolded him but the deceased boy committed
suicide and the appellant has got no role to play. It is
submitted that the appellant was in custody for some period
during trial and thereafter he is in custody since 23.01.2025
i.e. around one year after passing of judgment of conviction
and sentence by the learned Trial Court below and hence, he
may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer
for bail. It is submitted that due to the act of the appellant, the
deceased boy namely Badal Kumar Mahto had committed
suicide. It is submitted that the deceased had merely
committed theft of two packets of Gram (Chana) from the
shop of the appellant and for which the appellant had confined
him in the shop and had scolded him and as a result of shock
and mental depression he had committed suicide, who was
aged only thirteen (13) years and hence the prayer for bail of
the appellant may be rejected.
6. It is further submitted that all the prosecution witnesses
have fully supported the case against the appellant. P.W-3-
Shankari Devi, who is the grandmother (i.e. the informant of
this case) of the deceased and she had supported the case
against the appellant for scolding him and for charging him for
committing theft of 'Chocolate' in his shop.
7. Perused the L.C.R and considered the submission of
both sides.
8. It appears that the instant I.A. No.13051 of 2025 has
been filed after expiry of six months in the light of the order
dated 17.06.2025 passed by this Court.
9. It appears that the Victim was aged about 13 years and
was living with grandmother Shankari Devi-P.W-3.
10. It transpires from the impugned judgment that the
deceased had committed suicide inside his house after being
detained and scolded in shop of the appellant.
11. It also appears from the L.C.R that the appellant was
taken into custody on 02.05.2022 and he was released on bail
by the High Court of Jharkhand vide order dated 25.11.2022
passed in B.A. No.9159 of 2022 and was enlarged on bail by
the learned Trial Court on 02.12.0222 (i.e. more than six
months) and thereafter the appellant is in custody since
23.01.2025 (i.e. for around one year). Thus, the appellant has
remained in custody for around eighteen (18) months.
12. It also appears from the impugned judgment and
sentence passed by the learned Trial Court that no
compensation has been paid to the grandmother of the
deceased who was the informant of this case by learned Trial
Court below.
13. Hence, it will be desirable that certain amount of
compensation must be paid to the informant at this stage for
her survival also.
14. Considering the custody of the appellant and on the facts
and in the circumstances of this case, the appellant namely,
Shankar Bhuiyan @ Shankar, is directed to be released on
bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen
Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount, to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-
F.T.C (C.A.W), Bermo Tenughat, Bokaro, in connection with
S.T. No.453 of 2022, arising out of Bermo P.S. Case No.65 of
2022 (corresponding to G.R No.521 of 2022), subject to the
condition that one of the bailors must be the own relative of
the appellant.
15. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro and the
Superintendent of Police, Bokaro are directed to pay
compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rs.Four Lakhs) to the
informant Shankari Devi in the light of the provisions of
Section 357-A of Cr.P.C and Section 396 of the BNSS under
the Victim Compensation Scheme by holding meeting with
the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bokaro, the
Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, the Superintendent of Police,
Bokaro and the Secretary, DLSA, Bokaro.
The Secretary, DLSA, Bokaro shall submit a report
before this Court regarding payment of compensation. The
compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rs.Four Lakhs) must be paid
within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order.
16. Thus, I.A. No.13051 of 2025 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
17. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Deputy
Commissioner, Bokaro, the Superintendent of Police, Bokaro,
learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bokaro, the
Secretary, DLSA, Bokaro and also to the learned Member
Secretary, JHALSA and the learned APP for the needful.
18. Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bokaro is
directed to impress upon the Judicial Officers of the Court for
payment of compensation to the Victims or the family
members of the deceased in the judgeship of Bokaro who are
casually passing the judgment by ignoring the provisions of
Victim Compensation Scheme and Section 357-A of the
Cr.P.C and Section 396 of the BNSS.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Dated: 05.01.2026
Saket/-
