The court upheld certain convictions while granting bail based on the petitioner's lengthy custody and circumstances of the case.

JUDGMENT :

The present Criminal Revision No. 1207 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 12.06.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2024 by Shri Vishwa Nath Shukla, the learned Sessions Judge, Chaibasa whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Chaibasa has partly allowed and partly dismissed the Appeal and the acquitted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 337 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, however, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.02.2024 passed by Sri Binod Kumar, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa by the learned Trial Court below for the offences under Sections 279 of 338 of the Indian Penal Code are upheld. Although vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.02.2024 passed by Sri Binod Kumar, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa in connection with Manjhari P. S. Case No. 07 of 2018 corresponding to G. R. No. 162 of 2018, the petitioner was convicted for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six (6) months and to pay the fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six (6) months and to - pay fine of Rs. 500/ for the offence under Section 337 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of - one (1) year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code and and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one (1) year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

However, all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

2. I. A. No. 12987 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail, during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned judgments and order of sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eyes of law. It is submitted that the petitioner is driver. It is submitted that the petitioner has surrendered before the learned Court on 04.11.2014 and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

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

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also opposed the prayer for bail.

7. It appears that the petitioner is said to be running the offending vehicle in high speed and due to his rash and negligent driving, the informant and his uncle had sustained injury.

8. It appears that the petitioner is in custody since 04.11.2014 i.e. for about six months.

9. Considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the custody of the petitioner, during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application, the petitioner namely Kanuram Purty is directed to be released on bail, on -

furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/ (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Binod Kumar, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa/or his Successor Court in connection with Manjhari P. S. Case No. 07 of 2018 corresponding to G. R. No. 162 of 2018.

10. Thus, I. A. No. 12987 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.

Cr. Revision No. 1207 of 2024

11. Put up this case after one year under the appropriate heading.