JAGDISH YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No one appears for the appellant in spite of repeated calls, in spite of the fact that the case of this appellant was entrusted to one amicus curiae. As such, we have gone through the records, with the assistance of the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) At the outset, it may be stated that there were four appellants in this case, out of whom, appellants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, i.e., Puna Yadav, Kameshwar Yadav and Santosh Yadav were on bail, and the present appellant Jagdish Yadav is in custody. As no one was appearing for the appellants, on the previous dates also, the bails of the appellants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were cancelled and bailable warrants were issued against them. The execution report of the bailable warrants shows that appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have left their villages and their whereabouts were not known, and even their houses had also fallen down. In that view of the matter, this appeal, so far as appellants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, i.e., Puna Yadav, Kameshwar Yadav and Santosh Yadav, was dismissed by order dated 12.10.2018, issuing permanent non-bailable warrants against them, and indicating that upon execution of permanent non-bailable warrants, they may file application for restoration of their appeal, which may be considered favorably, if any such application is filed.

(3.) Thus, this appeal now continues against the present appellant Jagdish Yadav only, and we are confining our discussions in this Judgment only with respect to the present appellant.