Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 ------ Murli Ram S/o Sri Sibal Ram Resident of Villge- Bahanbai, P.S. Mufassil, District-Hazaribagh. …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent ------ For the Appellant(s) : Mr. P.P.N. Roy, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. P.D. Agarwal, Spl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA JUDGMENT Dated- 07.01.2025 By Court:- Heard Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. P.D. Agarwal, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 07.08.2006 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribag, in Sessions Trial No. 59 of 2002, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 376/511 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years for the offence under Section 376/511 with fine of Rs.5,000/- and further directed to undergo R.I. for one year under Section 354 of the I.P.C. with a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation and both the sentences were directed run concurrently. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 Page | 2 Factual Matrix 3. The prosecution case is based upon the fardbeyan of the informant/victim stating inter alia that in the night of 19.08.2001, she had gone to the house of her neighbor (the appellant) to watch cinema on T.V., at about 01.30 Am – 02:00 AM, the appellant told the victim that her mother was calling her. Upon this, the informant/victim came out near the courtyard, where the appellant all of a sudden came from back side and took her to the house of one Lalmuni where appellant told the informant/victim that he would do ‘sex’ with her and told her not to disclose anyone about this and in lieu of which Rs.100/- would be given to her. It is further alleged that as the appellant was busy in opening the door of Lalmuni’s house meanwhile, she managed to escape from there and reached at her house and disclosed the whole story to her parents. 4. On the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan, Sadar (Muffasil) P.S. Case no. 437/2001 was registered under Sections 376/511 of the I.P.C. against accused/appellant. 5. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on 18.02.2001. Learned C.J.M. Hazaribag took cognizance of offence against the appellant and case was committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial and disposal, where charges were explained to accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to substantiate the charges leveled against accused/appellant, altogether 11 witnesses were examined by the Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 Page | 3 prosecution. 7. The case of defence is denial from the charge and further plea of innocence and false implication. 8. After conclusion of trial, the learned trial court, after appraisal of the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties, held the appellant guilty for the offences under Section 376/511 and 354 of the I.P.C. and sentenced as stated above. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record offence under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the I.P.C. is not constituted in this case and the appellant has also been sentenced for the offence under Section 354 of the I.P.C. Therefore, the conviction under Section 376/511 is liable to be set aside. So far, the conviction of the appellant under Section 354 is concerned, the appellant has already been remained in custody for one and a half years. Therefore, the appellant has already sufficiently been punished for the offence committed by him. Accordingly, this appeal may be disposed of. 10. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed and defended the impugned judgment on merits and submitted that the learned trial court has very wisely and aptly considered the overall evidence available on record and arrived at right conclusion. No interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and order and this appeal is fit to be dismissed. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 Page | 4 11. I have gone through the entire evidence available on record along with impugned judgment in light of contentions raised on behalf of both side. 12. It appears that the most important witness is P.W.3 (victim/informant) and she has categorically stated in her examination-in-chief that the appellant took her to the house of the one P.W.9 (Lalmuni) and offered her to take Rs.100/- and forced her to do sex with him, but the victim/informant managed to escape from there and narrated the whole story to her parents. No medical report of victim has been brought on record. 13. Considering the nature of allegation of the victim which has been corroborated from the evidence of her family members and the above facts and circumstances and the nature of evidence adduced in this case, the ingredients of Section 376/511 of the I.P.C. is not attracted rather the conviction of appellant under Section 354 is appears to be justified in this case. It further transpires that the appellant has already undergone custody during the trial of the case and for the offence under Section 354 of the I.P.C., he was sentenced for one year imprisonment. Therefore, he has already undergone the sufficient punishment awarded to him. 14. In view of the above discussion and reasons, this appeal is partly allowed and conviction of the appellant under Section 376/511 of the I.P.C. is set aside and conviction under Section 354 is maintained. Appellant has undergone sufficient imprisonment awarded to him for the offence under Section 354 of the I.P.C. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1279 of 2006 Page | 5 15. Appellant is on bail, hence, he is discharged from the liability of bail bond and sureties shall also be discharged. 16. Pending I.A., if any stands disposed of. 17. Let a copy of this judgment along with trial court records be sent back to the court concerned for information and needful. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi Dated:-07.01.2025 Amar/-