Patna High Court - Orders
Tuba Tabassum vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 26 November, 2018
Bench: Hemant Kumar Srivastava, Rajendra Kumar Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Govt. Appeal (DB) No.15 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2012 Thana- HUSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
The State of Bihar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Manish Kumar, Son of Umesh Singh
2. Aarif Irshad, son of Irshad Ahmed
3. Ghulam Shahid, Son of Nuruddin Ahmed
4. Mohammad Danish, Son of Sibghatullah
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2012 Thana- HUSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Manish Kumar, S/o Umesh Singh, R/o village- Harihash Dakhin
Tola, P.S.- Hussainganj, District- Siwan.
2. Gulam Shahid, S/o Nuruddin Ahamd, R/o village- Harihash
Bashati, P.S.- Hussainganj, District- Siwan.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 722 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2012 Thana- HUSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Tuba Tabassum D/o Md. Aarif Ashraf,
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Manish Kumar, Son of Umesh Singh,
3. Aarif Irshad, Son of Irshad Ahmad,
4. Gulam Shahid, Son of Nuruddin Ahmed,
5. Mohammed Danish, Son of Sibghatullah,
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2012 Thana- HUSAINGANJ District- Siwan
Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.15 of 2017(8) dt.26-11-2018
2/5
======================================================
Arif Irshad, son of Md. Irshad @ Irshad Ahmad, Resident of Village-
Harihans, P.S.- Hussainganj, District- Siwan.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 3034 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2012 Thana- HUSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Md. Danish
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Govt. Appeal (DB) No. 15 of 2017)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
(In Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Udit Narayan Singh, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
(In Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 722 of 2017)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.
(In Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rampravesh Nath Tiwari, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Binod Bihari Singh
For the Informant : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
(In Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 3034 of 2017)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Ganesh Prasad Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR
SRIVASTAVA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR
SRIVASTAVA)
8 26-11-2018All the above stated appeals are listed together. Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.15 of 2017(8) dt.26-11-2018 3/5 Heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties.
It is pointed out that in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 a Single Bench of this court vide order dated 31.07.2017 observed that bail prayer of the appellants in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 shall be considered after receipt of the lower court records and now, the lower court records have already been received.
Learned counsel appearing in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 submits that the appellants are in jail custody for near about six years and they have sufficiently been punished by remaining in jail custody for such a long period. He further submits that there is no likelihood of taking of this criminal appeal for hearing and, therefore, the appellants should be released on bail.
The impugned judgment goes to show that it is a case of acid attack and it was appellant no. 1, namely, Manish Kumar in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 who is said to have thrown the acid on the victim causing severe injury to her and so far as the appellant no. 2 in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 is concerned, in course of trial the prosecution succeeded to prove that appellant no. 2 along with others entered into Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.15 of 2017(8) dt.26-11-2018 4/5 conspiracy and got executed the alleged crime.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, we are not inclined to enlarge the appellants in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 on bail at present and accordingly, their prayer for bail stand rejected. However, the appellants in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1803 of 2017 may renew their prayer for bail after nine months, if the appeal is not taken up for hearing within the above stated period of nine months.
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 has not been admitted as yet and accordingly, the above stated Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 is admitted for hearing.
The appellant in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 has sought bail and it is submitted on his behalf that appellant is also in jail custody for near about six years. It is also submitted that the allegation of throwing acid is against co- convict Manish Kumar and no specific overt-act has been attributed against the appellant in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 and, therefore, he should be released on bail but we are not at all, convinced with the aforesaid submission because in course of trial, prosecution claimed to have proved the theory of conspiracy in which appellant in Criminal Appeal Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.15 of 2017(8) dt.26-11-2018 5/5 (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 has taken active part and, therefore, the bail prayer of appellant in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2130 of 2017 stands rejected. However, he may renew his prayer for bail after nine months, if his appeal is not taken up for hearing.
So far as Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 722 of 2017 as well as Government Appeal (DB) No. 15 of 2017 are concerned, they have not been admitted as yet. Let both the afoesaid appeals be listed under the heading "For Admission" within one week.
(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) ( Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) shahzad/-
U T