Patna High Court - Orders
Ranvijay Gope And Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 2 May, 2019
Author: Rakesh Kumar
Bench: Rakesh Kumar, Anil Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 230 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-1999 Thana- Hilsa District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Ranvijay Gope S/o Late Nasib Gope
2. Amar Gope S/o Late Ram Bilash Gope
3. Bikan Gope S/o Late Arjun Gope
4. Bhosu Gope S/o Late Digvijay Gope
5. Anil Gope @ Bakal Gope S/o Late Arjun Gope
6. Sukhu Gope S/o Late Harshit Gope @ Harkhit Gope
All Residents of Village- Nesara
7. Balbir Gope S/o Late Harinandan Gope
8. Komal Gope S/o Harinandan Gope,
Appellants No. 7 and 8 are residents of Village- Shandh Bigha
All appellants of Police Station- Karai Parsurai and District- Nalanda.
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Sri Bindhya Keshri Kumar, Sr.Adv.
Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. S.K. Lal, Adv.
Mr. Rudal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rudal Prasad, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR)
6. 02-05-2019I.A. No. 2319 of 2018 I.A. No. 6 of 2019 I.A. No. 7 of 2019 I.A. No. 8 of 2019 In the present appeal, surprisingly though appeal was filed by eight appellants whereby learned counsel for the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.230 of 2017(6) dt.02-05-2019 2/6 appellants was authorized by the appellants in one vakalatnama, subsequently different petitions have been filed on behalf of different appellants.
I.A. No. 2319 of 2018 has been filed on behalf of appellant no. 2 Amar Gope, which has been filed by Sri Rudal Prasad, learned counsel.
I.A. No. 6 of 2019 has been filed on behalf of appellant no. 7 Balbir Gope and appellant no. 8 Komal Gope by another counsel namely Sri Rudal Singh.
I.A. No. 7 of 2019 has been filed on behalf of four appellants namely, Bikan Gope (appellant no. 3), Bhosu Gope (appellant no. 4), Anil Gope (appellant no. 5) and Sukhu Gope (appellant no. 6). This interlocutory application has been filed by Sri Birendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel.
The aforesaid three interlocutory applications have been filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') for granting bail and suspending sentence during pendency of the appeal, whereas I.A. No. 8 of 2019 has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of Balbir Gope and Komal Gope, appellant no. 7 and appellant no. 8 respectively for fixing early date of hearing of the appeal.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.230 of 2017(6) dt.02-05-2019 3/6 Re. I.A. No. 2319 of 2018 & I.A. No. 6 of 2019 Sri Rudal Prasad, learned counsel in I.A. No. 2319 of 2018 filed on behalf of Amar Gope (appellant no. 2) and Sri S.K. Lal, learned counsel assisted by Sri Rudal Singh learned counsel in I.A. No. 6 of 2019 filed on behalf of Balbir Gope and Komal Gope (appellant nos. 7 & 8 respectively), which have been filed under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C., on instruction, does not want to press the prayer for bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 2319 of 2018 and I.A. No. 6 of 2019 stand dismissed as not pressed.
Re. I.A. No. 7 of 2019 Sri Bindhya Keshri Kumar, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Birendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of four appellants submits that all the appellants were all along on bail. Only after conviction, they were taken into custody. It has been argued that save and except the fact that those appellants were shown as member of the mob, there is no evidence of any overt act against them and as such, it is a fit case for granting bail during pendency of appeal.
Sri Ajay Mishra, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant have opposed the prayer for bail. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.230 of 2017(6) dt.02-05-2019 4/6 Besides hearing, we have also perused the record. The present appeal, which has been filed on behalf of eight appellants including four appellants in I.A. No. 7 of 2019, was admitted and lower court record was called for. At the time of admission, the prayer for grant of bail and suspension of sentence was not pressed, on the ground that said prayer was to be made on receipt of the lower court record. Thereafter, on 04-05-2017, after receipt of lower court record, the matter was listed along with Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 270 of 2017 under the heading "For Orders" for considering the prayer for bail and a coordinate Bench of this Court had considered that the appellants were held guilty for offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, however; learned counsel for the appellants did not press the prayer for bail and same stood dismissed as not pressed. This order was passed in the month of May, 2017 and now in 2019, the present interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C.
In the case, on perusal of the record, it is evident that appellants along with others had arrived in the field and gave gun shot injury on one of the brother of the informant and one another brother of the informant was forcibly taken away. The person, who received gun shot injury, died and his dead body Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.230 of 2017(6) dt.02-05-2019 5/6 was thrown in a river. After about 4 days, another brother, who was kidnapped, was released. The four appellants in I.A. No. 7 of 2019 were shown as F.I.R. named accused. In the case, there were some unknown accused persons also. During the trial, the witnesses have supported the prosecution case and only after being satisfied, the learned Trial Judge, by a reasoned order, has passed the judgment of conviction and sentence.
Normally, once the prayer for bail is rejected, even rejected as not pressed, after conviction, there is no reason for entertaining subsequent bail petition on merit, but since learned senior counsel for the appellants {in I.A. No. 7 of 2019} has argued that the appellants were all along on bail, we again examined the same and after going through the same, we are of the considered opinion that neither the judgment of conviction and sentence is perverse nor the case of these four appellants can be considered as an exceptional one warranting interference.
Accordingly, the interlocutory application i.e. I.A. No. 7 of 2019 filed on behalf of aforesaid four appellants for grant of bail stands dismissed.
Re. I.A. No. 8 of 2019 The present interlocutory application has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of two appellants Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.230 of 2017(6) dt.02-05-2019 6/6 namely, Balbir Gope and Komal Gope (appellant no. 7 and 8 respectively) with a request to fix early date of hearing on the ground that one of the co-convict Dharmbir Gope {appellant in Cr.Appeal (DB) No. 270 of 2017} has remained in custody for more than nine years.
Since the interlocutory application i.e. I.A. No. 8 of 2019 has been filed by appellant no. 7 & 8 namely Balbir Gope and Komal Gope respectively, who have not remained in custody for such a long time, there is no reason to pass any favourable order.
The interlocutory application i.e. I.A. No. 8 of 2019 stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J.)
( Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
anay
U T