Mamta Devi vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

I.A. No. 10691 of 2024

Heard Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the State.

I.A. No. 10691 of 2024 has been filed for grant of suspension/stay of the judgment of conviction, during pendency of the present criminal appeal.

Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant has already been granted bail vide order dated 05.04.2023. He submits that the conviction has not been suspended. He further submits that the appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.12.2022 and 13.12.2022 respectively in S.T. Case No.347 of 2021 arising out of Rajarappa P.S. Case No.79/2016, corresponding to G.R. No.984/2016 passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV cum Special Judge, M.P./M.L.As. Cases, Hazaribag and she has been sentenced to undergo R.I. of two years for the offence under Section 148 of IPC, R.I. of two years for the offence under Section 332/149 of IPC, R.I. of five years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 333/149 of IPC, R.I. of five years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 307/149 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, she has been further directed to undergo S.I. of six months and direction is also there that all the sentences shall run concurrently. He submits that the appellant was a Member of the Legislative Assembly from Ramgarh Cantonment, but due to her conviction, she could not fight the election and she has also been deprived of being a Member of Legislative Assembly. He then submits that the informant, who is P.W.14, has not identified the appellant. He also submits that for the same occurrence, two FIRs have been lodged and the judgment of conviction passed in S.T. Case No.348 of 2021, arising out of Gola P.S. Case No.65/2016, corresponding to G.R. No.997/2016 has been stayed by this Court. He submits that there is no likelihood of taking up of this appeal for hearing in recent time and in view of that, the conviction may kindly be suspended.

Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the appellant is already on bail and there is no need of staying the judgment of conviction.

In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court has gone through the materials on record and finds that the informant has not identified this appellant, who happened to be the then Member of Legislative Assembly of Ramgarh Cantonment constituency and in one of the case arising out of the same occurrence, the judgment of conviction has been stayed by this Court in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.48 of 2023 vide order dated 14.10.2024.

The ramification of Sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 are wide-ranging. They not only affect the right of the appellant to continue in public life but also affect the right of the electorate, who have elected her to represent their constituency.

This Court considered the above aspects and particularly that the informant has not identified the appellant, hence the judgment of conviction needs to be stayed and further the appellant has already been granted bail vide order dated 05.04.2023, therefore, there shall be stay of the judgment of conviction dated 08.12.2022 passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV cum Special Judge, M.P./M.L.As. Cases, Hazaribag in S.T. Case No.347 of 2021, arising out of Rajarappa P.S. Case No.79/2016, corresponding to G.R. No.984/2016, during the pendency of the present criminal appeal.

In view of the above, I.A. No.10691 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.