Jharkhand High Court
Madan Rai vs State Of Jharkhand on 13 February, 2020
Author: Amitav K. Gupta
Bench: Amitav K. Gupta, Rajesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
I.A. No. 4461 of 2019
In
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 179 of 2019
1. Madan Rai
2. Senath Rai
3. Dineshwar Yadav
4. Guhi Rai @ Guli Rai
5. Lukho Devi
6. Herani Devi
7. Karu Rai
8. Rohit Rai
9. Fudan Rai ..... Appellants
Versus
State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
---------
For the Appellants : Mr. A. K. Kashyap, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Azeemuddin, APP
---------
th
05/Dated: 13 February, 2020
I.A. No. 4461 of 2019
1. This application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the appellants, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants, during pendency of the instant appeal.
2. The appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 147, 302/149 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and Section 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act in S. T. No. 79 of 2014 vide judgment dated 17.01.2019 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-II -cum- F.T.C. Offences Against Women, Dumka and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code; R.I. for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for one year; R.I. for three years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months; R.I. for three months under Section 3 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act and R.I. for six months under Section 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act.
3. Having heard learned senior counsel for the appellants and learned APP and on perusal of the materials on record, it transpires that there is no overt act alleged against the appellant no. 5, Lukho Devi, appellant no. 6, Herani Devi, appellant no. 7, Karu Rai and appellant no. 9, Fudan Rai. Considering that the appellants have remained in custody for more than five years, we are inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant no. 5, Lukho Devi, appellant no. 6, Herani Devi, appellant no. 7, Karu Rai and appellant no. 9, Fudan Rai on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-II -cum- F.T.C. Offences Against Women, Dumka, in S. T. No. 79 of 2014 subject to condition that the appellants shall deposit the fine amount of Rs. 12,000/- (Twelve Thousand) each, in the Court below which shall be disbursed in favour of the informant.
4. The appellants shall remain present before the Court, as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing, failing which their bail shall be cancelled.
5. So far as prayer for suspension of sentence of other appellants is concerned, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the appellant no. 1, Madan Rai, appellant no. 2, Senath Rai, appellant no. 3, Dineshwar Yadav, appellant no. 4, Guhi Rai @ Guli Rai and appellant no. 8, Rohit Rai on bail, at this stage.
5. In the result I.A. No. 4461 of 2019 is allowed in part to the extent as indicated above.
(Amitav K. Gupta, J) (Rajesh Kumar, J) Kamlesh/Shahid