Cr. Appeal No. 772 of 2002
---
Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
08.11.2002
passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast
Track Court, Saraikella-Kharsawan in Sessions Trial No. 293 of 1996.
1. Kalo Sona Dev
2. Prabhakar Nath Shahdeo
3. Kishan Dev Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand Respondent
---
For the Appellants: Mr. Dilip Kumar Chakraborty, Amicus Curiae
For the State: Mr. S.N. Rajgarhia, APP
—
PRESENT
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.K. Merathia
—
Judgment
—
Dated 15h September 2011
Nobody appears on behalf of the appellants to press this appeal.
It appears that nobody appeared on 23.09.2010 when the case was
called out.
Accordingly, Mr. Dilip Kumar Chakraborty, learned panel
lawyer, is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist this court. Mr. S.N.
Rajgarhia, learned State counsel appears for the State. Both are
directed to assist this court in this appeal in the second half.
(R.K. Merathia, J)
Later on: Heard the parties on the merits at length.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 08.11.2002 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Saraikella-Kharsawan in Sessions
Trial No. 293 of 1996 convicting the appellant-Kalo Sona Dev under
sections 148 and 452 IPC and under section 27 of the Arms Act and
sentencing him to undergo R.I. for one year under section 148 IPC,
R.I. for three years under section 452 IPC and R.I. for three years
under section 27 of the Arms Act, whereas appellants-Prabhakar Nath
Shahdeo and Kishan Dev were convicted under section sections 147
and 452 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year under section
147 and R.I. for three years under section 452 IPC.
3. After hearing the parties and going through the records
carefully, when I indicated that no grounds are made out for
interference with the judgment of conviction passed by the trial court
against the appellants, learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that this case relates to the year 1995; and that the benefit
of section 360 Cr.Pc may be given to the appellants.
4. Mr. Rajgarhia, learned counsel appearing for the State, has got
no objection to such prayer.
5. In the circumstances, the judgment of conviction passed by the
trial court against the appellants is upheld. So far as the sentence is
concerned, the trial court will ensure appearance of the appellants
within six weeks, for complying with the provisions of section 360
Cr.Pc. If they appear, the learned trial court will proceed in terms of
section 360 Cr.Pc and if the appellants furnish bonds in terms
thereof, they will be discharged from the bail bonds and they will not
be required to undergo sentence imposed against them. However, if
one or other appellant fail to appear before the trial court, their bail
bonds will be cancelled and he / they will be taken into custody for
serving out at least half of the sentence awarded by the trial court.
6. With this modification in the sentence, this appeal stands
dismissed.
(R.K. Merathia, J)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated 15th September 2011
Ranjeet/