Advocates:
['ASHUTOSH KR SINGH', '', 'VENKATESHWAR GOPAL', 'ASHUTOSH', 'PRIYA SHRESTHA']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Revision No. 172 of 2014

1. Laxmi Narayan Mahato, son of Vijay Mahato

2. Kanhaiya Sahu, son of Jagdish Sahu

3. Gopal Sahu, son of Jagdish Sahu

4. Albina Lugun, wife of Bishwajeet Samad

5. Azad Hembrom, son of Butru Hembrom

…

…

…

Petitioners

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand

…

… Opposite Party

With

Cr. Revision No. 1098 of 2014

Ganesh Pramanik @ Ganesh Paramanik, Son of late Sudhir

Parmanik

…

…

…

Petitioner

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand

…

…

Opposite Party

With

Cr. Revision No. 261 of 2014

Ashraf Ali, Son of Late Akbar Ali …

…

…

Petitioner

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand

…

… Opposite Party

---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner s

: Mr. Anil Kumar, Senior Advocate

Ms. Chandana Kumari, Advocate

(in Cr. Rev. 172/14 and Cr. Rev. 261/14)

Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate

(in Cr. Rev. 1098/14)

For the Opp. Party

: Ms. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P.

(In Cr. Rev. 172/14)

Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.

(In Cr. Rev. 1098/14)

Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P.

(In Cr. Rev. 261/14)

---

Through Video Conferencing

---

CAV on 14.09.2020

Pronounced on 04.01.2021

1.

Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, the learned Senior counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioners in Criminal Revision Nos.

172 of 2014 and 261 of 2014.

2

2.

Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar, the learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the petitioner in Cr. Revision No. 1098 of 2014.

3.

Heard Ms. Priya Shrestha, the learned A.P.P. appearing

on behalf of the opposite party- State in Cr. Revision No. 172 of

2014.

4.

Heard Mrs. Ruby Pandey, the learned A.P.P. appearing

on behalf of the opposite party- State in Cr. Revision No. 1098

of 2014.

5.

Heard Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, the learned A.P.P.

appearing on behalf of the opposite party- State in Cr. Revision

No. 261 of 2014.

6.

All the three criminal revision petitions are directed

against the common judgment dated 31.01.2014 passed by the

learned Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in

Criminal Appeal No. 100/2013 and Criminal Appeal No.

102/2013, whereby the learned appellate court dismissed the

criminal appeals confirming and upholding the judgement of

conviction and the order of sentence dated 30.08.2013 passed by

the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Porahat at Chaibasa in

G.R. Case No. 384/1995, T.R. No. 05/2013.

7.

The learned trial court convicted the petitioners under

Sections 406, 418 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code

(hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and sentenced them to undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for one and half year with fine of Rs.

3,000/- for the offence under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code;

one and half year of Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.

3,000/- for the offence under Section 418 of Indian Penal Code;

and one year of Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 3,000/-

for the offence under Section 120B of Indian Penal Code. It has

been directed by the learned court below that in case of default

in payment of fine, the petitioner would undergo simple

imprisonment for further six months for each section and all the

sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3

8.

The prosecution story is based on a written report (Ext.-

8/1) of the then Circle Officer addressed to Officer-in-charge

Manoharpur Police Station that he, in the light of Letter No.3

dated 02.12.1995 of the Deputy Commissioner, enquired in

relation to Crisent Housing Finance Ltd. and found that the

said company was constituted on 04.04.1994 of which one

Mirza Suhail Beg was Managing Director, Md. Kalim Khan and

Ravi Srivastava were Directors. Shri Gane