The absence of independent witnesses in a criminal case raises concerns about the credibility of the prosecution's evidence, impacting the decision on bail.

JUDGMENT :

I.A. No.4227 of 2025

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 02.07.2024 passed by Ms. Kusum Kumari, learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Ramgarh in Cr. Appeal No.20 of 2020 by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.02.2020 passed by Sri Rajesh Kumar- II, learned A.C.J.M, Ramgarh, in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.240 of 2011 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.3393 of 2011) by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 25(1-B)a/35 of Arms act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three (03) years for each of the offence and to pay the fine of Rs.10,000/- for each of the offence.

2. I.A. No.4227 of 2025 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. R.S. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 there is false recovery of pistol has been shown. It is submitted that no independent witness has been examined and all the witnesses are police personnels. It is submitted that petitioner was in custody during trial from 13.12.2011 to 22.05.2012. Thereafter he was arrested on 21.03.2025 and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It has been submitted that there is recovery of one loaded pistol along with .315 Bore bullet from the possession of the petitioner. It has been submitted that seizure list witnesses have supported the recovery of pistol from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner has got criminal antecedent also and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected.

6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and on going through the records, it appears that petitioner alleged to have been arrested with one loaded pistol of .315 bore bullet.

7. It also appears that no independent witness had been examined by the prosecution rather all the witnesses were the police personnels.

8. Considering the custody of the petitioner and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the petitioner namely, Vikash Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bittu Vishwakarma is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri Rajesh Kumar-II, learned A.C.J.M, Ramgarh/ or his Successor Court, in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.240 of 2011 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.3393 of 2011).

9. Thus, I.A. No.4227 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of.

Cr. Rev. No. 371 of 2025

10. Put up this case after one year under the heading ‘For Admission.’