D.K. Sinha, J. - (1.) INSTANT interlocutory application has been filed under Section 389 (1) & (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of the Appellant on bail during pendency of hearing of this appeal.
(2.) APPELLANT had preferred this appeal against the judgment of his conviction and sentence recorded by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Sessions Case No. 67/97/349/01/98/02, by which he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/ -with default stipulation for his conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. At the time of admission, Appellant was admitted to bail during pendency of this appeal and when the appeal was taken up for hearing on 23.9.2010, none appeared on call on behalf of the Appellant to press the appeal, as such, ad interim order granting bail to the Appellant was vacated and the trial court was directed to issue warrant of arrest against the Appellant. Pursuant to such direction and execution of such order, Appellant was arrested in the month of October, 2010 and since then he is in custody.
(3.) WITH reference to paragraph -5 of the interlocutory application, counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant was not at all at fault. As a matter of fact, when the appeal was called out for hearing, counsel was engaged in another Court arguing a case and could not be able to reach by the time, the order was dictated in the Court. It was beyond the control of the Appellant as well as the counsel and therefore, in view of the detention of the Appellant as well, his prayer for ad interim bail may be considered.;