High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Sandip Kumar vs The State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 6 October 2017 · Citation: (2017) 10 JH CK 0003

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anant Bijay Singh
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-323>Section 323</a>, <a href=1767-506>Section 506</a>, <a href=1767-341>Section 341</a> - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt - Punishment for criminal ,intimidation - Punishment for wrongful
CASE NUMBER
1427 of 2017
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

35 paragraphs · 453 words

I.A. No. 7284 of 2017

1.

The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant

praying for grant of bail after suspending the sentence during the pendency of the

appeal, who has faced trial in Special (P) Case No. 35 of 2016, whereby and

whereunder by judgment of conviction dated 13.07.2017 and order of sentence

dated 15.07.2017 passed by Sri Syed Matloob Hussain, Additional Sessions Judge-1-

cum-Special Judge, Ist, Dhanbad has found the appellant guilty under sections 323,

341 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code and udner section 8 of POCSO Act and has

sentenced to undergo R.I for a period of six months under section 323 of the Indian

Penal Code. The appellant was further directed to undergo S.I for a period of one

month under section 341 of the Indian Penal Code and the convict will further

undergo R.I for a period of one year under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The

appellant is further sentenced to undergo R.I for a period of four years under section 8

of POCSO Act, with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he will

further undergo S.I for three months. All the sentences were directed to run

concurrently.

2.

This criminal appeal has been admitted on 23.08.2017 and L.C.R. was called for

which has been received.

3.

It was submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody

since 06.05.2016 and there is contradiction in the evidences of the witnesses. Further,

it has been submitted that the appeal of the year, 2003-04 is being heard and there is

no likelihood to be heard the instant appeal in near future.

4.

Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

5.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby suspend the sentence

awarded to aforesaid appellant and accordingly, above named appellant is directed to be released on bail during pendency of this instant appeal on furnishing bail bond of

Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands), with two sureties of the like amount each to the

satisfaction of the court of Sri Syed Matloob Hussain, Additional Sessions Judge-1-

cum-Special Judge, Ist, Dhanbad in connection with Special (P) Case No. 35 of 2016.

The appellant is directed to deposit fine amount of Rs. 10,000/- before the trial court

on the date of his furnishing bail bond. Thereafter, the trial court is directed to issue

notice to the P.W.-1-victim and after her appearance the aforesaid amount would be

released in favour of the P.W.1-victim after making proper verification.

I.A. No.7284 of 2017 stands allowed and disposed of.

6.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the concerned trial court

through FAX.