The conviction under Section 420 IPC was deemed erroneous as the actual landlord received the full consideration, establishing the petitioner's innocence.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

1. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 19th August, 2024, passed by Shri Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi, in Criminal Appeal No. 190 of 2023, by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed, thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30th August, 2023, passed by Ms. Sonali Singh, J.M.F.C.-XVIII, Ranchi, in G.R. Case No.3280 of 2015 ( arising out of P.S. Case No. 254 of 2015), by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 420 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for Two (02) years and also to pay the fine of Rs. 2000/-.

I.A. No. 12658 of 2024

2. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgments and sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the Informant has falsely implicated the petitioner in this case. It is submitted that the P.W.2 is the landlord of the land in question, who has received the full consideration amount. However, the Court below has committed illegality by convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 I.P.C. It is further submitted that the petitioner has remained in custody for 15 months and hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

It is submitted that the petitioner has cheated the Informant of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees 3 lacs) and hence, the prayer for bail may be rejected.

5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and considering the facts of the case and on perusal of the Lower Court records, it appears that the petitioner was the broker of the landlord P.W.2-Ajay Oraon and he has been implicated only for introducing himself as the landlord, whereas, in fact, P.W.2 is the landlord in question and who has received the entire consideration amount.

6. It also appears from the record of the learned Trial Court that the petitioner was in custody from 04.01.2016 to 16.02.2017. Thereafter, after dismissal of the criminal appeal he had surrendered before the learned Court below on 14.11.2024 and since then he is in custody and thus it appears that the petitioner has been in custody for about15 months of the sentence of Simple Imprisonment of Two (02) years.

7. Therefore, taking into consideration the period of custody of the petitioner and on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner, namely Sandeep Kispotta @ Sandeep Kispostta is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ms. Sonali Singh, learned J.M.F.C.-XVIII, Ranchi or her Successor Court in connection with G.R. Case No.3280 of 2015 ( arising out of P.S. Case No. 254 of 2015).

8. Thus, this I.A. No. 12658 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.

Criminal Revision No. 1234 of 2024

9. The L.C.R. has also been received.

10. Issue Notice to O.P. No. 2 vide Registered Post with A/D as well as Ordinary Process, as to why this Criminal Revision Application be not admitted and disposed of at the stage of Admission itself, for which requisites etc. shall be filed within two weeks.

11. Put up this case on 24^th March, 2025.