[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Ramu Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 March, 2026
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.424 of 2025
------
Ramu Singh, aged about 28 years, S/o Surendra Singh, resident of
village - Pidul, P.O. & P.S. - Rania, District- Khunti
.... .... .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Respondent
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellant : Ms. Ruchi Mukti, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Bandana Sinha, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No:-09 Dated:-17-03-2026
I.A. No.13392 of 2024
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this interlocutory
application has been filed with the prayer to suspend the order of
sentence dated 04.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-III, Khunti in connection with S.T. Case No.108 of 2018 arising out
of Rania P.S. Case No.06 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No.144 of
2017. It is next submitted that the appellant has been held guilty for the
offences punishable under Section 25 (1-B)a/35 of the Arms Act and has
been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and
has also been imposed a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default, to undergo
Simple Imprisonment for two months. Besides, the appellant has also been
convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25 (1-A)/35 of the
Arms Act for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, he was directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a
period of three months. In respect of the offence punishable under Section
26 (2)/35 of the Arms Act, for which the appellant was also convicted, the
appellant has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six
years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further
undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months. In respect of the offence
punishable under Section 17 (2) of the C.L.A Act, for which the appellant
was also convicted, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for two years and it has been directed that all the sentences
shall run concurrently. It is next submitted that the appellant has very
good grounds to agitate in this appeal and the appellant was on bail
during the trial of the case and he has all along co-operated with the trial.
It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the appeal being
disposed of in near future. It is next submitted that the appellant has been
in custody since the date of the impugned judgment in S.T. Case No.108 of
2018 i.e., from 30.05.2024 as is evident from the order-sheet dated
02.12.2025 wherein in para-3 it has categorically been mentioned that the
appellant was in custody from 20.04.2017 to 03.10.2017 i.e., for five months
and fourteen days during the pendency of the case in the trial court and
thereafter he was in custody since 30.05.2024 to 03.06.2024 i.e., till the date
of sentence. It is also submitted that the appellant was in custody for a
total period of five months and nineteen days, during the pendency of the
case in the trial court. It is further submitted that in the impugned
judgment in the internal page-22 running page-39 of the brief, has
erroneously been mentioned that on 30.05.2024 the appellant- Ramu Singh
is in judicial custody in this case, as he was produced in this case from
judicial custody in connection with some other case but he was in bail in
this case since 03.10.2017. It is further submitted that though expressly the
bail of the appellant- Ramu Singh was not cancelled in connection with
S.T. Case No.108 of 2018, even after his conviction but he has been
remanded to judicial custody under the erroneous impression that he has
been in judicial custody in connection with S.T. Case No.108 of 2018. It is
then submitted that the appellant has all along been in custody since
04.06.2024 and the co-convict Nicholas Topno has been granted bail by the
coordinate bench of this court. It is also submitted that the appellant
undertakes to co-operate with the hearing of this appeal. Hence, it is
submitted that the sentence of the appellant be suspended.
Considering the facts of the case, the sentence of the appellant,
named above, shall remain suspended till disposal of this appeal on
furnishing 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, Khunti in connection with S.T. Case No.108
of 2018 arising out of Rania P.S. Case No.06 of 2017 corresponding to G.R.
Case No.144 of 2017 with the condition that he will co-operate with the
hearing of this appeal.
Accordingly, this Interlocutory Application is allowed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
List this appeal under the heading 'Hearing' before the appropriate
Bench.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Dated- 17.03.2026-Animesh/
