Arvind Rajwar vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State on the prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A. No. 2208 of 2019.

Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 396 of I.P.C in Sessions Trial no. 699/2016/Sessions Trial No. 163/2017/T.R. No. 08/2017 by the impugned order dated 16th May, 2018 rendered by the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-FTC (CAW), Ranchi and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each with a default sentence by the impugned order of sentence dated 17th May, 2018.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the case of the informant (P.W.1) is that eight unknown persons intercepted the truck of the informant and captured him along with two cleaners, namely, Sonu Kumar and Gautam Kumar and some mixture was forcibly put into their mouth, as a result of which informant and other became semi-unconscious. One of the cleaners, namely, Gautam Kumar died. Informant and two other cleaners were also assaulted before forcible administering of mixture into their mouth. The accused were arrested on 25th August, 2016 and T.I.P was conducted on 17th November, 2016. P.W.1 the informant though has identified the appellant in T.I.P, but P.W.2 the other cleaner, namely, Sonu Kumar in his deposition has stated that photographs of the accused persons were published in the Newspaper. Other cleaner, namely, Gautam Kumar has died during his treatment. In this case other accused persons are still at large and one of the co-accused, who faced trial is also absconding. Trial has been conducted for the charge under Section 396 of I.P.C though the ingredients whereof are not fulfilled. As such, appellant who is in custody since 26th August, 2016 should be enlarged on bail during pendency of this appeal.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. An affidavit has been filed pursuant to the query made by this Court on 20th June, 2019 by the Inspector-cum-Officer Incharge of Namkum Police Station about the status of the absconder accused persons. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that appellant has been identified during T.I.P by both the informant and other cleaner Sonu Kumar (P.Ws. 1 and 2 respectively). The defence has not suggested that the photograph of the accused persons were visible in the publication. One person has died as result of the assault as also found from the statement of the Doctor (P.W.7), who conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Gautam Kumar. As such, for such heinous crime appellant should not be enlarged on bail at this stage as he has been in custody for little less than 3 years.

We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant and State, perused the material evidence on record relied upon by the parties and also taken note of the aforesaid facts and circumstances. Since the appellant was identified during T.I.P by P.W.1 informant, we are not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A. No. 2208 of 2019 is rejected.

We have perused the affidavit of Officer-in-Charge of Namkum Police Station.

Investigating Officer is required to apprehend the absconder accused person and also complete the investigation as against as many as 10 accused persons.

Let status report be brought on record through affidavit of the Officer-in-Charge, Namkum Police Station about apprehension of the absconder accused and conclusion of the investigation against remaining accused persons within a period of 4 weeks.

Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi should monitor the matter, so that the absconder accused are brought to trial and the investigation is completed against remaining accused persons in this case when F.I.R was instituted on 20th June, 2016.