Jharkhand High Court
Kunal Kumar Mahto @ Kunal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 October, 2020
Author: H. C. Mishra
Bench: H.C. Mishra, Rajesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.53 of 2018
Kunal Kumar Mahto @ Kunal .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Appellant : Mr. Awanish Shekhar, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate
.........
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
.........
I.A. No.4413 of 2020 8/21.10.2020 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for the informant on the interlocutory application filed by the appellant for renewing the prayer for bail during the pendency of the appeal.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 305 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine.
Earlier bail application of this appellant was rejected by this Court. Learned counsel for the appellant has renewed the prayer for bail submitting that the appellant is in custody since 08.7.2015 and has completed more than half of the sentence.
In the facts of the case and taking into consideration the period of custody of the appellant, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail. Accordingly, appellant Kunal Kumar Mahto @ Kunal is directed to be released on bail, during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVII- cum- FTC (CWA), Ranchi, in connection with S.T. No.111 of 2016.
The Trial Court below, however, before issuing the release order, shall satisfy itself that the appellant has served more than half of the sentence and if this statement is found to be incorrect, the release order shall not be issued by the Trial Court and the matter shall be reported to this Court.
The aforesaid interlocutory application is accordingly, allowed with the direction as above.
(H. C. Mishra, J.) (Rajesh Kumar, J.) R.Kumar