SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Bachhu Yadav - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 1257 of 202
Decided On : 25-02-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Manoj Kumar Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP

Conviction under IPC for negligent driving resulting in death affirmed; bail granted considering custody duration and case circumstances.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 279 and 304A - Criminal Revision Application challenging conviction and sentence for negligent driving resulting in death - The petitioner was convicted for driving in a manner endangering human life and causing death by negligence. The conviction was affirmed by the appellate court. (Paras 1, 10)

(B) Bail Application - The petitioner sought bail during the pendency of the revision application, asserting that the judgments were illegal and arbitrary. The court considered the duration of custody and granted bail on specific terms. (Paras 2, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was convicted for the offences under Sections 279 and 304A of the IPC, sentenced to three months and one year of rigorous imprisonment respectively, and has been in custody since 05.07.2024. (Paras 1, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found the petitioner eligible for bail considering the length of custody and the nature of the case. (Paras 8)

Issues: The main issues included whether the judgments were sustainable and the appropriateness of granting bail. (Paras 4, 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner’s continued custody warranted bail, emphasizing the necessity of evaluating the legality of the lower courts' judgments. (Paras 8)

Result: Bail granted.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

I.A. No.9434 of 2024

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 15.09.2014 passed by Sri Girijesh Kumar Dubey, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Palamau at Daltonganj in Cr. Appeal No.39 of 2009 by which the appeal filed on behalf of the appellant has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.04.2009 passed by Sri Yogesh Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No.145 of 2005, corresponding to G.R Case No.1560 of 2005 (T.R.Case No.325 of 2009) by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 279/304A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three months under Section 279 of the IPC and R.I for one year under Section 304A of IPC .

2. I.A. No.9434 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the petitioner, during pendency of the present Criminal Revision Application.

3. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar No.2, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned APP for the State.

4. It is submitted that the impugned judgments and sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 05.07.2024 out of S.I of one year and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and on perusal of record it appears that the petitioner was driving the said offended vehicle.

7. It appears that petitioner is custody since 05.07.2024.

8. Considering the custody of the petitioner and on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner namely Bachhu Yadav is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Yogesh Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Palamau at Daltonganj)/ or his Successor Court in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No.145 of 2005, corresponding to G.R Case No.1560 of 2005 (T.R.Case No.325 of 2009.

9. Thus, I.A. No.9434 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.

Cr. Rev. No. 1257 of 2023

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead the informant as O.P. No.2 in this case in course of the day.

11. Issue notice to the O.P. No.2 as to why this Criminal Revision Application be not admitted and disposed of at the time of admission stage itself, by registered post with A/D as well as ordinary process and for which, requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks from today.

12. Put up this case on 01.05.2025, if requisites are filed. 13. Call for the scanned copy of the Lower Court Record.

14. In the meantime, let a report be called for from the learned Secretary, DLSA, Palamau at Daltonganj as to whether the family members of the victim have been granted any compensation under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act or not?

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top