Amit Kumar Singh vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. on renewed prayer for suspension of sentence of this appellant made through I.A. No. 3553 of 2022. This appellant along with Arjun Verma, Rajesh Kumar Sao and Shera Sharma have been convicted under Section 302 of the I.P.C vide impugned judgment of conviction dated 07.12.2019 passed in S.T. Case No. 129/2017 by the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge SC/ST, Ranchi, and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, Pawan Verma and default sentence vide impugned order of sentence dated 09.12.2019.

Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution case was dependent upon the statement of P.W.-1 and P.W. 2 who claimed themselves to be the eye-witness. P.W.-2 and 3 have been declared hostile, while P.W. 4 to 6 are hearsay witnesses. So far as the statement of P.W.-1 made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and during trial is concerned, the same are not in conformity with the medical evidence of the Doctor P.W.-8, who has opined in the post mortem report that the deceased was assaulted by heavy sharp cutting weapon. P.W.-1 and 2 were also drinking bear and claimed to have seen the victim being assaulted with broken bear bottles by the four accused persons. The allegation against all the four accused person was omnibus. Learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court has, however, on consideration of the materials on lower court records vide order dated 07th April, 2022, enlarged the appellant Arjun Verma, Rajesh Kumar Sao (appellants in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 233 of 2020) and Shera Sharma (appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 479 of 2020) on bail taking note of the discrepancy in the statement of P.W.-1 vis-à-vis the medical report. The case of the present appellant stands on similar footing. He has been in custody since 07th December, 2019. As such, he may also be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer.

We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the materials placed from the lower court records and also gone through the order dated 07th April, 2022 passed in the case of other co-convicts by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It appears on consideration of the materials on record that the statement of P.W.-1 as far as the weapon of assault i.e., beer bottle is in variance with the medical post mortem report, which shows use of heavy sharp cutting weapon on the body of the deceased. Moreover, P.W.-2 who also claimed to be the eye-witness turned hostile during trial. Taking into note these facts, the Co-ordinate Bench of this court has enlarged the co-convicts on bail. We are inclined to take the same view as the appellant’s case is similarly situated.

Accordingly, the appellant, named above, during the pendency of this appeal, shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII cum Special Judge SC/ST Ranchi in connection with S.T. No. 129 of 2017 with the condition that one of the bailors shall be the deponent of the affidavit, Lovely Devi, wife of Amarnath Singh, Resident of Ratu Road, Indrapuri Road No. 13, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, 834005 whose U.I.D. card enclosed to the I.A. be sent to learned trial court for verification at the time of his release. Other bailor shall be the family member/close relative of the appellant. Appellant and his bailors shall not change their mobile numbers or address without permission of trial court and shall also submit their Aadhar Card at the time of his release.

I.A. No. 3553 of 2022 stands disposed of.