Sheque Akram Alias Sk Akram Vs the State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:19697

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.346 of 2019 With

Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.357 of 2019

[Against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 08.03.2019, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge – II, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No.300 of 2018, arising out of Bistupur P.S. Case No.236 of 2017, corresponding to G.R No.2176 of 2017]

¶5

Subhash Chandra Behra, aged about 46 years, S/o Late Hemant Kumar Behra, R/o Beidaposhi, Rairangpur, N.A.C, P.O & P.S., Rairangpur Dist. Rairangpur, State - Odisha

¶6

..... Appellant

¶7

[in Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.346 of 2019]

¶8

Sheque Akram @ Sk Akram @ Seikh Akaram, aged about 22 years, Son of Seikh Hanif, Resident of Village Bahalda, P.O & P.S. - Bahalda, District – Mayurbhanj (Orissa).

¶9

..... Appellant [in Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.357 of 2019]

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent [in both the Cr. Appeals ] ---------

¶12

PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶13

For the Appellants : Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Advocate Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.346 of 2019] Mr. Md. Abdul Wahab, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.357 of 2019] For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, A.P.P Mr. Azeemuddin, A.P.P ---------

¶14

Order No.03/ Dated: 06th July, 2026

¶15

1. The captioned appeals arise out of a common judgment, hence the same have been clubbed and heard together and being disposed of with a common judgment.

¶16

2. Heard Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Mr. Md. Abdul Wahab, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Santosh Kumar

¶17

- 1 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶18

2026:JHHC:19697

¶19

Shumka and Mr. Azeemuddin, learned counsel for the State.

¶20

3. The present appeals are directed against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.03.2019, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - II, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No.300 of 2018, arising out of Bistupur P.S. Case No.236 of 2017 (G.R. No.2176 of 2017), whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

¶21

4. The prosecution story, in short, as per the self statement of the informant Sriniwas, Inspector -cumofficer-in-charge of Bistupur Police Station is that on secret information after forming a team he alongwith other police officials and personnel namely Inspector Irdad Ansari, S.I. Upendra Singh, A.S.I Shiv Prakash Ram, A.S.I. Dilip Kumar Yadav, Constable Munir Khan and Constable Gyanchandra Yadav proceeded to Shastrinagar on 05.08.17 at 23.25 in the night for verifying the secret information and at 23.35 in the night, they reached at Kadma, Road No.2 and one suspicious accused namely Akram was apprehended for inquiry. During course of inquiry, accused Akram said that he has been living in his sasural at Shastrinagar, Road No.2 for last 7-8 months and he has also stated his permanent address at village & P.O Bahalda, District Mayurbhanj (Odissa). Further, he stated that he alongwith his

¶22

- 2 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶23

2026:JHHC:19697 associates namely Md. Samir @ Abhishek and Abdul Ansari used to commits theft of motorcycle from various places in Jamshedpur town area and sells it in Odisha state at Bahalda, Rairangpur with the help of one Subhash Chandra Behra and Seikh Kurjan after changing the number plates of stolen motorcycle and one Md. Ali @ Raja also helps in selling the stolen motorcycle. He further disclosed that on 18.02.17, he has committed theft of one Passion Pro motorcycle from Bistupur Contractor Area and kept it at Rairangpur in the house of Subhash Chandra Behra for selling it and other stolen motorcycles were also kept at Rairangpur, Jharpokhariya and Bahalda and the said motorcycles may be recovered. On 06.08.17 at 1.00 hours they proceeded for Rairangpur alongwith accused Akram and reached at Rairangpur in the village Baidhapasi and on the basis of pointing out by accused Akram they made a search of the house of Subhash Chandra Behra in presence of two independent witnesses and with the help of local police, four motorcycles bearing registration Nos.JH05AL/1838, Chasis No.MBLMA10EWBGJ-20182, JH05AD/0406, MBLHA 10 AMAGE 58201, Passion Pro motorcycle bearing Chasis No.MBLJA12ACEGM03861 and JH-05AZ/3600, Chasis no.MBLHA10ABEGC00835 were recovered for which Subhash Chandra Behra had no valid papers and then all the motorcycles were seized after preparing seizure list. Further on disclosure of both the accused persons other four motorcycles were also

¶24

- 3 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶25

2026:JHHC:19697

¶26

recovered and all the stolen motorcycles were seized after preparing seizure list. From the house of Akram, one Apache motorcycle bearing registration no.JH-05AR/2234, Chasis no.MD634KE49D2N41320 was recovered which was seized after preparing seizure list. During course of inquiry, accused Akram has stated that all the aforesaid stolen motorcycles were brought from Jamshedpur Town Area which were stolen by accused Akram, Md. Samir @ Abhishek and Abdul Ansari and kept for selling in the house of Subhash Chandra Behra and all the three accused persons were arrested.

¶27

On the basis of above information of the informant, Bistupur P.S Case No.236 of 217 has been registered under Sections 411/ 34, 413, 414/34 IPC, against the present appellants and others and the police, after completing the investigation, has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused persons and others and the charge has been framed under Sections Sections 411/ 34, 413, 414/34 IPC against the present appellants and others.

¶28

The case has been committed to the court of Sessions to which the appellants have pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried and accordingly, the trial has commenced.

¶29

5. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution has examined altogether 12 witnesses and their depositions, in brief, are as follows:-

¶30

6. P.W.-1, Gyan Chandra Yadav, is the the police

¶31

- 4 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶32

2026:JHHC:19697

¶33

constable and member of police party. He has supported the prosecution case.

¶34

In cross-examination, he could not memorize the time of seizure as well as seizure list witness.

¶35

7. P.W.-2, Upendra Narayan Singh, is the officer-incharge of Birsanagar Police Station and member of the police party and he has also supported the case.

¶36

In cross-examination, he has admitted that at the time of recording confessional statement of the accused persons, no independent witness was present there.

¶37

8. P.W.-3, Dilip Kumar Yadav, is the A.S.I of the Bistupur Police Station. He has also supported the prosecution story being a part of police team.

¶38

9. P.W.-4, Sriniwas , is the Inspector -cum- officer-incharge of Bistupur Police Station and the informant of this case. He has reiterated the same version as narrated in his written report (Ext.-5). He has deposed that after arresting the accused persons, he prepared the written report and lodged the F.I.R.

¶39

In cross-examination, he has stated that on doubt, appellant/ Akaram was arrested and his name was came during interrogation from the accused persons of another case. He has admitted that he has no knowledge about any other case against Akaram.

¶40

10. P.W.-5, Imdad Ansarie , is the officer-in-charge of the M.G.M Police Station and member of the police team. He has also supported the case.

¶41

- 5 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶42

2026:JHHC:19697

¶43

In cross-examination, he has admitted that the confessional statement of Seikh Akaram was recorded by A.S.I Shiv Prakash Ram, but no independent witness was present there.

¶44

11. P.W.-6, Sudhir Hembram, P.W.-7, Ajit Kumar Behra, P.W.-8, Sapan Kumar Patro, P.W.-9, Pradeep Chandra Patro, P.W.-10, Gulam Mustafa, and P.W.-11, Sajid., are the seizure list witnesses. P.Ws.-7, 10 and 11 have been declared hostile.

¶45

12. P.W.-12, Shiv Prakash Ram , is the A.S.I of Bistupur Police Station and a member of the police team. He is also the investigating officer of the case. He has deposed that after completion of investigation he has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused.

¶46

13. On consideration of above materials on record, the trial Court has acquitted the present appellants for the charges under Sections 414/ 413 IPC and found them guilty only for the offence under Section 411 of the IPC, and sentenced them, as stated above.

¶47

14. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction, the appellants have preferred the present appeals.

¶48

15. Learned counsel for the appellants, while referring to the depositions of the aforesaid witnesses, has submitted that :-

¶49

(i) although the present appellants have been charged for the offence under Sections 411/

¶50

- 6 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶51

2026:JHHC:19697

¶52

34, 413, 414/34 IPC, but they have been convicted only for the offence under Section 411 IPC .

¶53

(ii) there is no aggravating circumstances, rather it is their first offence, but for the reasons best known to the court below, maximum punishment has been awarded.

¶54

(iii) while the incident had taken place, the appellants were young persons having bright future and further, there is nothing on record to justify the maximum punishment awarded to the appellants.

¶55

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellant namely, Subhash Chandra Behara has remained in custody for about six months while the appellant namely, Sheque Akram @ Akram Seikh Akaram, has remained in custody for about one year and on the above basis, prayer has been made for reduction in the sentencing part.

¶56

16. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

¶57

17. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that although the allegation is that the appellants are habitual offenders, but they have been punished only for the offence under Section 411 IPC for an isolated incident and without any criminal antecedent, giving maximum punishment otherwise is also not justified.

¶58

- 7 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

¶59

2026:JHHC:19697

¶60

18. Considering the above facts and the fact that one of the appellants has remained in custody for six months and the another one for a year, I am inclined to reduce the sentence awarded to the present appellants. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants is, hereby, upheld but the sentencing part is hereby, reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶61

19. With above modifications in the sentencing part, the present appeals are, hereby, disposed of.

¶62

20. The appellants are on bail, hence, they are discharged from the liability of bail bond.

¶63

21. Let the Trial Court Records be sent back to the Court concerned forthwith, along with the copy of this Judgment.

¶64

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶65

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated, the 06^th July, 2026 Ravi-Chandan /- NAFR Uploaded on 09.07.2026

¶66

- 8 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.346 of 2019 & 357 of 2019

Sheque Akram Alias Sk Akram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheque Akram Alias Sk Akram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Budhan Mochi Alias Budhan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Managing Director, Jharkhand Industrial Area Development Authority, Represented Thro Varun Ranjan Vs Sudhir Kumar

Nagendra Pathak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raghunath Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Harish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Acb

Sameer Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand