High CourtsDivision Bench

Bishu Hembrom vs The State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 29 April 2014 · Citation: (2014) 04 JH CK 0031

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J · Amitav Kumar Gupta, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Cr. (Jail) Appeal (DB) No. 83 of 2014
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 329 words

Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J.—This Criminal Appeal has already been admitted vide order dated 25th of February, 2014.

2.

Record and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 89 of 2011 was called for appreciating the arguments for suspension of sentence, awarded by the trial court to the appellant-accused.

3.

This Court has received the record and proceedings of S.T. No. 89 of 2011 and we have perused the same and heard the counsel for/both the sides.

4.

Looking to the evidences on record there is prima facie case against this appellant-accused. As the Criminal Appeal is pending we are not analysing much the evidences on record but suffice it to say that the case of the prosecution is based upon the eye-witness who is P.W.-1, the informant, husband of the deceased and the father of this appellant-accused.

5.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, which shows that the son has committed murder of his mother and looking to the deposition of P.W.-1, who has clearly given the deposition so far as role played by this appellant-accused in causing murder of the deceased-Sanjali Baskey. The deposition of P.W.-1 constitutes a prima facie case against this appellant-accused. Moreover, the deposition given by P.W.-1 is corroborative with the deposition given by P.W.-4 who is Dr. Ramesh Prasad Verma. Moreover, the deposition given by P.W.-8-the Investigating Officer is also corroborative to the deposition given by P.W.-1 so far as place of occurrence and the time of occurrence etc. are concerned and also looking to the other evidences on record, there is prima facie case against this appellant-accused.

6.

Hence, looking to the prima facie case against this appellant-accused, the gravity of the offence, the quantum of punishment and the role played by this appellant in committing the murder of the deceased, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant-accused by the Trial Court.

7.

There is no substance in this Interlocutory Application, hence the same is hereby rejected.