Akhilesh Yadav vs State Of Jharkhand

I.A. No.2793 of 2019

Heard, learned Senior counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The sole appellant has been convicted vide judgment of conviction dated 15.02.2019 rendered in S.T. No. 100/2012 by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence committed and punishable under Section 147 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence committed and punishable under Section 148 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5000/-for offence committed and punishable under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine the appellant shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year by the impugned order of sentence dated 18.02.2019. Period already undergone in judicial custody shall be set off as per law. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

The interlocutory application has been filed for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant during pendency of the appeal as the appellant was on bail during the trial has never misused the privilege of bail.

Learned Senior counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has no criminal antecedent except that he has been made an accused in the present case. Learned Senior counsel for the appellant has further submitted that as per the impugned order also only on the basis of evidence of P.W.4 and P.W.5 the appellant has been convicted. P.W.4 has been declared hostile on the point of identification of the appellant. So far P.W.5 is concerned, she has categorically stated that this appellant used to treat the injured extremist, as such he has connection with the extremist group though during cross-examination this witness has admitted that she has never stated these facts to the police as police has never asked her about this, as such the appellant may be enlarged on bail, putting condition so that appellant may not free from clutches of the law.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case of last seen of the appellant-deceased. Thereafter deceased was not found rather dead body was found and mother of the deceased, P.W.5 has categorically alleged the involvement of appellant, as such the appellant being an extremist may not be enlarged on bail as other accused persons of this case are still at large and the investigation is continue against them, as such this appellant may not be enlarged on bail.

Heard, learned Senior counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State as well as perused the lower court record. It appears that appellant has no criminal antecedent and nobody is eye witness to the occurrence. Apart from that, only evidence against the appellant is based upon the last seen of theory of P.W.5 though P.W.5 has categorically stated that she has not stated before the police that this appellant was treating the injured extremist.

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the appellant named above is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar in connection with S.T. No. 100/2012 arising out of Manika P.S. Case No. 76/2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 575/2011 with condition that one of the bailors must be government servant and another bailor be the father of the appellant. The appellant shall also furnish his mobile number and address to the court below and shall not change the same without prior permission of learned trial court. The appellant shall also appear before the Officer-in-Charge as and when he is asked to appear and apart from this, appellant shall appear on each 1st Monday of the English Calendar month at 10:30 A.M before the Officer-in-Charge, Manika police station in the District Latehar.

I.A. No.2793 of 2019 stands allowed.

The State is also at liberty to file cancellation for bail if any of the terms and conditions is violated or if it is found that this appellant has any criminal antecedent in any District.