Judgment:
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.928of2006 with DeathReferenceNo.03of2009 with I.A.No.938of2012 1.AshokDubey 2.AjayKumarDubey 3.JashwantDubey 4.HimansuDubey Appellants Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICEP .P.Bhatt FortheAppellants: Mr.P .C.Tripathy,Sr.Advocate FortheState: Mr.SumirPrasad,A.P .P. FortheInformant: Mr.SharvanKumar,Advocate 17/Dated:17 th September,2012 Oralorder: PerD.N.Patel,J.:
1. Havingheardcounselforboththesidesandlookingtothefactsand circumstances of the case, it appears that the present applicant namely Himansu Dubey, has been convicted mainly for the offence punishable underSection302oftheIndianPenalCodeinSessionsTrialNo.608of 1993 vide judgment and order of conviction dated 21 st June, 2006 and orderofsentencedated23rdJune,2006.Againstthisjudgmentandorderof convictionandsentence,thepresentCriminalAppealNo.928of2006has been preferred. Initially, there was an order passed by this Court for suspension of sentence dated 13th August, 2007 and thereafter, Death ReferenceNo.03of2009arisingoutofSessionsTrialNo.02of2004came beforethisCourtforconfirmationofthedeathsentence.InthiscaseAshok DubeyisanaccusedwhereasHimansuDubeyashewasabsconder,whois alsoanapplicantinI.A.No.938of2012therefore,thetrialwasseparated andnumberedasSessionsTrialNo.2Aof2004.
2. It further appears from the facts of the case that in Sessions Trial No.2Aof2004,thisCourtgrantedbailunderSection439oftheCodeof Criminal Procedure on7th February,2012inBail ApplicationNo. 558of 2012.
3. ItfurtherappearsfromthefactsofthecasethatthisCourtvideorder 2. dated 22nd July, 2011 in Death Reference No. 03 of 2009 directed the SuperintendentofPolice,Chatratoapprehendthepresentapplicant.
4. Itfurtherappearsfromthefactsofthecasethaton23 rdAugust,2011 thebailbondofthepresentapplicantwascancelled.
5. Itiscontendedbythe counselforthe applicantinthe I.A.thatin DeathReferenceNo.03of2009,theapplicantoftheI.A.isnotapartyat allnorheisapartyinSessionsTrialNo.02of2004andwhereverheisa partyi.e.inSessionsTrialNo.2Aof2004,hehasalreadybeenenlargedon bail.Similarly,inCriminal AppealNo.928of2006,thereisanorderof suspension of sentence passed by this Court and therefore, the present applicantmaybegrantedbailbyrecallingtheorderdated22 ndJuly,2011 aswellas23rdAugust,2011.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently submitted that the present applicantisinhabitofabscondingtimeandagainandafterlotofeffortshe hasbeensenttojudicialcustody.LearnedA.P.P.hasmeticulouslypointed outthatrightfromthebeginningfromSessionsTrialNo.608of1993he wasabscondingintheSessionsTrialalso.Thereafter,hewasarrested,trial was conducted and on the basis of the prosecution witnesses he was convictedandsentencedon23rdJune,2006forlifeimprisonment.Itisalso vehementlysubmittedbythelearnedA.P.P.thattheSessionsTrialisofthe year 1993 and the order of conviction and sentence is dated 23 rd June, 2006.Forsuch13longyears,theSessionsTrialcouldnotbecompleted because of the present applicant, who was absconding for a substantial period.
7. It is further submitted by the learned A.P.P. that in Sessions Trial No.2Aof2004,thepresentapplicantwasarrestedbecause hewasalso abscondinginSessionsTrialNo.02of2004andashewasabsconding,the Sessions Trial was separated and numbered as Sessions Trial No. 2A of 2004.IthasalsobeensubmittedbythelearnedA.P.P.thatthisCourthas recordedinorderdated22nd July,2011thatatthestageofrecordingof statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,thepresentapplicantwasabscondinginSessionsTrialNo.02of 2004. As he was absconding there was no option, but, to separate the Sessions Trial. Thus, time and again, this applicant was absconding and therefore,letrecordandproceedingofSessionsTrialNo.02of2004besent backtotheconcernedTrialCourtsothatthepresentapplicant,whoisnow 3. arrestedbytheorderofthisCourt,hisstatementunderSection313ofthe CodeofCriminalProceduremayberecordedinSessionsTrialNo.2Aof 2004andthereafter,thismattermaybeadjournedforfourweeks.
8. Havingheardcounselforboththesidesincludingthecounselforthe informant it appears that the applicant namely Himansu Dubey was abscondingtimeandagainrightfromSessionsTrialNo.608of1993,again inSessionsTrialNo.02of2004andafterlotofeffortshewasarrestedand atpresent,heisinjailbyvirtueoftheorderofthisCourtandtherefore,we are of the agreement with the submissions of the learned A.P.P. and therefore,Wehereby,directtheRegistryofthisCourttosentrecordsand proceedingsofSessionsTrialNo.02of2004totheconcernedtrialcourtfor furtherproceedingintheSessionsTrial.ItissubmittedbythelearnedA.P.P. fortheStateaswellasbythecounselfortheInformantthatinSessions TrialNo.2Aof2004alltheprosecutionwitnesseshavebeenexaminedand onlyrecordingofstatementoftheaccusedunderSection313oftheCodeof CriminalProcedureisleftout.
9. Thematterisadjournedon31stOctober,2012. (D.N.Patel,J.) (P.P.Bhatt,J.) VK/