Baijun Kisku @ Langra @ Juna Marandi aged about 52 years son of late v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.709 of 2023 ----- Baijun Kisku @ Langra @ Juna Marandi aged about 52 years son of late Jurgu Kisku, Resident of Village-Dardmara (Jamuniatand), P.O. – Harladih, P.S.-Khukra, District – Giridih. … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ------- CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------- For the Appellant For the Respondent
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, Advocate : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P. Order No. 08/Dated 21st September, 2023 ------ 1. Reference may be made to the order dated 8th September, 2023. 2. A report has been submitted, available on record at Flag ‘X’, furnished by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih. 3. It has been stated therein that the charge was already framed on 29.08.2023. But, due to inadvertence of the Bench Clerk, no progress was shown in the CIS and it was shown that the date was deferred to 26.09.2023. Subsequently, when it was detected, then the same was directed to be rectified. 4. We, on perusal of the said report, is very much surprised that the Presiding Judge is taking very casual approach in putting the progress regarding the cases in the CIS even though all the Presiding Judges are aware with the fact that the progress is to be displayed in the system since it 2 is being displayed in the NJDG for the convenience of the people at large. 5. The explanation which has been furnished by putting blame upon the Bench Clerk cannot be said to be sufficient explanation which, according to our view, is shifting of the accountability by the Presiding Judge upon the Bench Clerk. 6. Further, while hearing the matter of Chatra Judgeship, i.e., Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1031 of 2023 arising out of Kunda P.S. Case No.35 of 2022, we have found from the CIS that no detail/progress has been uploaded about the said case, rather, it is being shown as blank. This Court takes this seriously. 7. Since, the progress in each and every case is required to be uploaded in the CIS in order to achieve the object and intent of the NJDG for knowing the people at large, therefore, we hereby direct all the Presiding Judges of each Judgeship to monitor the progress of each case so that it be uploaded in the evening of the same date so as not to cause any inconvenience to the parties concerned. 8. It is made clear that failure in discharging the duty will be viewed by this Court seriously in future. 9. Learned Registrar General of this Court is directed to communicate this order forthwith Principal District Judges/Judicial Commissioner across the State for its strict adherence. 3 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.709 of 2023 10. The instant appeal under section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 has been directed against the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Giridih in M.C.A. No.2138 of 2022 corresponding to S.T. No.69 of 2020 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with Pirtand P.S. Case No.15 of 2017, registered for the offence under sections 147/148/149/307/120B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of U.A.P. Act, has been rejected. 11. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that although the appellant is named in the F.I.R. but his complicity has been disclosed by two apprehended accused persons. 12. It has been submitted that no incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the appellant. 13. It has also been submitted that the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 05.03.2019 and chargesheet has already been submitted. 14. The further submission has been made that identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Binod Hansda, Baijnath Mahto and Durga Tudu @ Soren have been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 25.08.2018 in B.A. No.6710 of 2018, vide order dated 03.12.2019 in B.A. No.10907 of 2019 and vide order dated 26.09.2022 in 4 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.813 of 2022 respectively. Therefore, it is also a case where the impugned order may be interfered with so that he may come out from the judicial custody. 15. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the opposite party-State, based upon the material available in the case diary as also the counter affidavit which has been filed in pursuance to the liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2023, has submitted that the allegation against the appellant is serious, since the appellant has been apprehended on the basis of the statement made by the two co-accused persons having been found to be active members of the banned organization. 16. This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the identically placed accused persons, namely, namely, Binod Hansda, Baijnath Mahto and Durga Tudu @ Soren have been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 25.08.2018 in B.A. No.6710 of 2018, vide order dated 03.12.2019 in B.A. No.10907 of 2019 and vide order dated 26.09.2022 in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.813 of 2022 respectively, have already been directed to be released on bail, hence, there is no reason to take different view with respect to the case of the present appellant since the case of the appellant has been identically placed which has not been disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 5 17. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the impugned order requires interference. 18. Accordingly, the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Giridih in M.C.A. No.2138 of 2022 corresponding to S.T. No.69 of 2020, is, hereby, quashed and set aside. 19. 20. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih in connection with Pirtand P.S. Case No.15 of 2017, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered. 21.
Decision
Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Birendra/