IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.703 of 2025

…

Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Lotan ……Appellant

Versus

1.The State of Jharkhand

2. Anupama Gupta (Informant) ……Respondent

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

-----

For the Appellant : Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.PP

……

Order No.13/05^th January 2026

I.A. No.11566 of 2025

1. Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate is appearing through the Jharkhand High Court Legal Service Committee, Ranchi on behalf

of the appellant, who is in custody.

2. This Criminal appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the judgment of conviction dated 10.12.2024 and sentence dated 13.12.2024 passed in Sessions Trial No.748 of 2023 arising out of Dhanbad P.S. Case No.245 of 2023 by Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh No.III learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Dhanbad by which the appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 341 and 325 of I.P.C and sentenced to undergo S.I. for one month and R. I. for five (05) years and to pay

the fine of 3,000/- respectively.

However, all the sentences have been directed to run

concurrently.

3. I.A. No. 11566 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the

appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

Spl.P.P.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

impugned judgment and sentence passed by the learned Court below is illegal and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated by the Informant in this case at the instance of some local people. It is submitted that the allegation for assaulting the Informant and her sister are false and concocted. It is submitted that the occurrence took place on 17.06.2023 and the appellant was arrested on 18.06.2023 but till submission of chargesheet he was not put on T.I. Parade and he was identified for the first time in the Court on 12.12.2023 by PW- 1 i.e. Anupama Gupta and PW-2 i.e. Anuradha Gupta. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since 18.06.2023 and thus he remained in custody for more than two and a half years out of R.I. for five years and hence he may be enlarged on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned Spl.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the appellant and submitted that the appellant had brutally assaulted the informant Anupama Gupta and her sister Anuradha Gupta and the Informant had sustained fourteen (14) stiches on her face and even one teeth of was also broken and bruises were found on another injured Anuradha Gupta. It is further submitted that a golden chain was belonging to Anupama Gupta also removed by the appellant. It is submitted that the PW-1 Anupama Gupta is the informant and the PW-2 Anuradha Gupta i.e. the Injured of this case, have fully supported the prosecution case for assaulting them and for snatching the gold chain from her sister. It is submitted that the PW-4 who is the Doctor in this case and who found injury on the person of both the injured i.e. PW-1 and PW-2 and had stated that grievous injury was found on PW-1 Anupama Gupta and her right upper incisor teeth was broken and she was bleeding from her mouth whereas another injured Anuradha Gupta had sustained two injuries on person which were caused by hard and blunt substance. It is further submitted that the PW-5 is the I.O. of this case who had submitted the chargesheet against the appellant. Learned Spl.P.P. further submitted that appellant was arrested in this case on the statement of the nearby people and hence the prayer of bail of the appellant may be rejected.

7. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears that the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown on 17.06.2023 by the Informant Anupama Gupta who alongwith her sister was assaulted by one unknown person and who also tried to snatch her bag and mercilessly assaulted them by lathi due to which Anupama Gupta i.e. the Informant had unde