INTHEHIGHCOURTOF JHARKHAND ATRANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 509 of 2017 ---------

Karma Mahto son of Late Udhawa Mahto, resident of Village Getlatu, P.O. Neori, Vikash, P.S. Sadar, District Ranchi (Jharkhand)

Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand …

--------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASA…D O pp. Party HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ----------

For the Appellant : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Saket Kumar, APP -----------

13/Dated: 5^th December, 2025 I.A. No. 13129 of 2025:

1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section

389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for keeping the sentence in abeyance in connection with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.01.2017 and 12.01.2017, respectively passed by the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in connection with S.T. Case No. 245 of 2010 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 02 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 03 of 2010, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of the payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo sentence of one year simple imprisonment.

2. Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that although the prayer for suspension of sentence has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2023 passed in I.A. No. 1861 of 2023, but the prayer is being renewed on the ground of the period of custody having been undergone, i.e., approximately

11 years.

3. While, on the other hand, Mr. Saket Kumar learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State however has raised objection so far as the culpability said to be committed by the appellant, but he has fair enough to admit the fact about the period of custody having been undergone by the appellant.

4. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Although, the case of the appellant has been rejected on the earlier occasion by passing order dated 02.03.2023 passed in I.A. No. 1861 of 2023, but while hearing this matter on 13.11.2025, in the present interlocutory application, considering the period of sentence of more than 10 years having been undergone by the appellant, the learned APP was directed to file affidavit-in-objection along with societal itmhep caacst ea os fp Seorm thees hju Cdhgomuernats irae nVd. Sertaedte b oyf MthPe &H oAnn’bolteh eArp reexp Coortuerdt iin (2021) SCC OnLine SC 480.

6. In pursuance thereof, objection has been filed which is Annexed at Annexure-C but it is not disclosed in thereof that how the appellant, if he comes out of the custody, will impact the society.

7. Since we are dealing the instant application in the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and as would be evident from Annexure-C of the objection filed to the interlocutory application, it is not disputed that the appellant has undergone the period of sentence for approximately 11 years. We are also considering the fact that the present appellant is having no criminal antecedents, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant has been able to make out a case for suspension of sentence.

8. Accordingly, I.A. No. 13129 of 2025 stands allowed.

9. In consequence thereof, the appellant, named above, is directed to be released on bail, during pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in connection with S.T. Case No. 245 of 2010 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 02 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 03 of 2010.

10. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove will not prejudice the case on merit, since, the criminal appeal is lying pending before this Court for its consideration.

11. In view thereof, I.A. No. 13129 of 2025 stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and