CHUNCHUN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the instant Interlocutory Application bearing I.A. No. 1486 of 2023 has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the petitioner No.2, namely, Rameshwar Mahato @ Rameshwar Sao on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the instant Revision Application has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dtd. 24/8/2022 passed by the learned lower appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 189 of 2019, whereby and whereunder, the learned appellate Court has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dtd. 9/10/2019 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in G.R. No. 2023 of 2013, arising out of Katras P.S. Case No. 120 of 2013, corresponding to TR No. 990 of 2019, whereby the revisionist was found guilty for committing offence under Ss. 353, 323 and 332 all read with Ss. 149 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twelve months with a fine of Rs.1000.00 for committing offence under Sec. 323 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment for twelve months with a fine of Rs.2000.00 for committing offence under Sec. 353 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment of eighteen months with a fine of Rs.3000.00 for committing offence under Sec. 332 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment for twelve months with a fine of Rs.1000.00 for committing offence under Sec. 147 of the Indian Penal Code and; rigorous imprisonment for eighteen months with a fine of Rs.1000.00 for committing offence under Sec. 225 r/w Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, he has to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months with respect to each offence and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It has further been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner No.2 was in custody from 20/11/2013 to 14/5/2014 and further from 3/2/2023 as on date and, as such, it is submitted that the petitioner has already served sentence of four months, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. It has also been pointed out that the witnesses examined on behalf of the accused i.e. DW2, DW4, DW5, DW8, DW33 and DW24 has not been appreciated in the right perspective. It has further been pointed out that the learned Courts below including the trial Court and the learned lower appellate Court did not apply their judicial minds and committed gross error in appreciation of the fact that for want of the evidence of memo of arrest of one Rajesh Gupta, who was said to have been arrested in a case and this petitioner along with co- accused persons wanted to rescue unlawfully from the police custody and, therefore, the present case has been instituted against him and co-accused persons but it has not been substantiated inasmuch as the memo of arrest of Rajesh Gupta has not been prepared as stated by the Investigating Officer in his deposition and, therefore, it is urged that the petitioner No.2 may be enlarged on bail as other co-convict have already been enlarged on bail and the case of this petitioner stands on better footing. On the other hand, Mr. Deepankar, ld. A.C. to Government Advocate-III appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that the petitioner no. 2 does not deserve to be enlarged on bail because of the criminal antecedent and further he has been convicted in the serious offence, inter alia, under Sec. 225, 332 and 353 and r/w Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code and all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution, therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.

(2.) Having taken into consideration the aforesaid submissions advanced on behalf of both the parties, perused the records of the case.

(3.) In the backdrop of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the materials available on record, this Court finds it just and reasonable to enlarge the petitioner no.2 on bail and hence the petitioner No. 2, namely, Rameshwar Mahato @ Rameshwar Sao is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Thousands only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Katras PS Case No. 120 of 2013, corresponding to GR No. 2023 of 2013 and TR No. 990 of 2019, subject to payment of fine as awarded by the learned Court below in different counts/ Sec. without being prejudice to his right of defence. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1486 of 2023 is disposed of. Cr. Revision No. 1166 of 2022