Sikkim High Court
Ranjit Ghimirey vs State Of Sikkim on 28 May, 2024
Author: Meenakshi Madan Rai
Bench: Meenakshi Madan Rai
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
(Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
DATED : 28th May, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH : THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I.A. No.02 of 2024 in Crl. A. No.10 of 2024
Appellant/Petitioner : Ranjit Ghimirey
versus
Respondent : State of Sikkim
Application under Section 389 read with Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance
Mr. R. C. Sharma, Advocate for the Appellant/Petitioner.
Mr. S. K. Chettri, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-
Respondent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER (ORAL)
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1. I.A. No.02 of 2024 is an application under Section 389
read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(hereinafter, the "Cr.P.C."), filed by the Petitioner/Convict seeking
suspension of sentence and release on bail, till the final disposal of
the Appeal.
2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner was enlarged on bail vide Order dated 10-10-2022, in ST
(VIG) Case No.02 of 2019, (State of Sikkim vs. Ranjit Ghimirey
and Others), by the Court of the Learned Special Judge, P.C. Act,
East Sikkim, at Gangtok. The bail was granted by imposing certain
terms and conditions. Thereafter, during the course of trial, the
Petitioner consistently attended the Court proceedings without
violating any terms and conditions laid down in the bail order, by
the Learned Trial Court. That, on completion of trial, he was
convicted vide the Judgment in ST (VIG) Case No.02 of 2019,
Ranjit Ghimirey vs. State of Sikkim
(State of Sikkim vs. Ranjit Ghimirey and Others), dated 21-02-
2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471, 420
read with Section 34 and Section 120B(2) of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment
for a term of three years under each of the Sections that he was
convicted for, along with direction to pay a fine of ₹ 10,000/-
(Rupees ten thousand) only, each, under each of the convicted
Sections. A default clause of imprisonment on non-payment of fine
was also imposed.
(i) Thereafter, he was enlarged on bail by the Learned
Trial Court in terms of Section 389(3) of the Cr.P.C.
(ii) An Appeal against the impugned Judgment was filed
before this Court which was admitted, however, the petition for
suspension of sentence and enlargement of the Petitioner on bail
was rejected, vide Order of this Court dated 26-04-2024 in I.A.
No.01 of 2024, in Crl. A. No.10 of 2024, inter alia on grounds that
the Petitioner/Convict had flouted the order of the Learned Trial
Court with impunity, as sixty days allowed to him to file the Appeal
and obtain bail from the Appellate Court was not adhered to and he
continued to remain at large for almost sixty-six days.
(iii) It was submitted by Learned Counsel for the Petitioner,
the circumstance arose out of the Learned Counsel for the
Petitioner being remiss and the fault was not that of the convict,
who is aged about 51 years and suffering from various ailments.
That, the Petitioner is a Sikkimese with his home and hearth in
Soreng, and there is no risk of him violating the terms and
conditions, if enlarged on bail, as his exemplary conduct before the
Learned Trial Court would reveal. That, he is a respectable citizen
Ranjit Ghimirey vs. State of Sikkim
and has no reason to abscond. That, in fact, his detention in
prison would prejudice his family as he has a school going son and
wife, who is alone after the incarceration of the Petitioner. They
are both dependent on the Petitioner. That, he is a patient of
hypertension on medication and due to increased stress arising
from the incarceration could suffer serious medical complications.
Hence, the Petition be considered sympathetically on the grounds
raised and the Petitioner be released on bail pending the Appeal
and his sentence be suspended accordingly.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that he
has no objection to the petition as the grounds advanced by the
Learned Counsel are reasonable and the Petitioner is ailing and on
medication, which may also be duly considered. That, the
Petitioner is a respectable citizen and his family are dependent
upon him, besides, admittedly, it is the fault of the Counsel for not
taking timely steps in filing the petition under Section 389 of the
Cr.P.C. and the Appeal. That, he be enlarged by imposition of
certain conditions.
4. I have heard and considered the grounds put forth by
Learned Counsel for the parties. I have considered the conduct of
the Petitioner during the period when he was on bail before the
Learned Trial Court, his medical condition supported by documents
and his age.
5. In view of the said grounds, I am of the considered
opinion that this is a fit case where the Petitioner can be enlarged
on bail subject to the following conditions;
(i) He shall furnish PB&SB of ₹ 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five
thousand) only, each, with one solvent surety, to the
Ranjit Ghimirey vs. State of Sikkim
satisfaction of the Learned Court of the Special Judge,
P.C. Act, East Sikkim, at Gangtok.
(ii) He shall, however, not leave the State without the prior
permission of the said Court.
(iii) He shall appear before this Court on all dates fixed for
hearing of the Appeal.
(iv) Should he fail to report to this Court on the dates fixed,
his bail bonds shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken
into custody forthwith.
6. Sentence imposed by the Learned Trial Court against
the Petitioner, vide the impugned Order on Sentence dated 21-02-
2024, accordingly stands suspended till further orders.
7. The observations made hereinabove are only for the
purposes of the instant I.A. and shall in no manner be construed as
findings on the merits of the Appeal.
8. I.A. No.02 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
9. A copy of this Order be forwarded to the Learned Trial
Court immediately for information and compliance.
10. Copy of this Order also be forwarded to the Jail
Authority at the Central Prison, Rongyek, by e-mail for information
and necessary steps along with a soft copy to the Jail
Superintendent for making it over to the Petitioner/Convict.
( Meenakshi Madan Rai )
Judge
28-05-2024
ds/sdl
