Page | 1 Cr.A. (SJ).No. 479 of 2007 ------ [Against the judgment of conviction dated 27.02.2007 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-IV, Bokaro in Sessions Trial No. 259 of 2004] Lakhi Ram Mahto, son of Late Trilocan Mahto, R/o Village Bahadurpur, P.S. Chandankyari, District-Bokaro. .... .... …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, Advocate : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agarwal, Spl.PP ------ Dated: 17.01.2025 By Court: Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 27.02.2007 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-IV, Bokaro in Sessions Trial No. 259 of 2004, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal is that on 22.05.2004 the informant had gone to Murlidih in the marriage of his niece and when he returned from the marriage, then his wife Almani Devi told him that Lakhi Ram Mahato, resident of Bahadurpur, P.S. Barmasiya, who lived with and worked in the crop field of Mukteshwar Mahato, committed rape on 22.05.2004 at 1:00 PM with the daughter of the informant, who is dumb and aged about 19 years. Lakhi Ram Mahato forcibly laid down informant’s daughter on the ground and Page | 2 inserted cloth in her mouth and then committed rape on her. When the wife of the informant heard the cry of her daughter, who was at that time on the other side of the house came and gave one brick assault on the back of the accused, then Lakhi Ram Mahato ran away from the house, which was seen by many persons. The informant had filed one case against Bhuneshwar Mahato and Sunil Mahato, in which they had gone to jail. Lakhi Ram Mahato lived in the house of Gupteshwar Mahato, Sunil Mahato and Thakur Mahato of village Simuliya and on their instigation, Lakhi Ram had committed this offence. When the informant returned from the marriage, then he came to know about the incident of rape and also his daughter narrated him through sign that she has been raped. 4. On the basis of above information, F.I.R. being Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 60 of 2004 was instituted for the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. 5. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted by the police for the offence under section 376 I.P.C and the learned CJM took cognizance of the offence on 12.07.2004 and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial and disposal where the charge under section 376 IPC was framed and explained to him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to substantiate the charge levelled against accused, altogether eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution. Apart from oral evidence, the prosecution has adduced following documentary evidences:- Exhibit-1 : Written Report. Page | 3 Exhibit-2 : Injury Report. Exhibit-3 and 3/1 : Pathological Report of Victim 7. After completion of trial, the learned trial court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant without touching the merits of the judgment has confined his argument to the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant for the offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and submits that during trial and post-conviction, appellant has undergone about three years in custody and has sufficiently being punished for the offence committed by him, therefore sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the imprisonment already undergone. 9. Learned counsel for the State has defended the impugned judgment of conviction of the appellant on merits, however in the matter of sentence, he has raised no serious objection. 10. I have gone through the record of the case along with impugned judgment and order in the light of the contentions raised on behalf of both side. 11. It appears that in course of trial, altogether eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution including the victim (PW-8). The allegation against the appellant has been found substantiated through cogent and reliable evidence available on record. Therefore, conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 376/511 of the I.P.C. requires no interference by way of this appeal. 12. It is also apparent that the appellant has remained in custody for about three years during course of trial and after conviction, he has remained in custody for five years. Page | 4 Therefore the appellant has substantially undergone the sentence awarded to him. 13. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence committed by the appellant, it appears that for the ends of justice, the imprisonment already undergone by the appellant appears to be sufficient punishment in this case. 14. In view of aforesaid discussions and reasons, the impugned judgment of conviction of the appellant is upheld, but the sentence passed by the learned trial Court is reduced to imprisonment already undergone by the appellant during trial of the case. 15. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed on merits with modification in sentence as stated above. 16. Appellant is on bail, he is discharged from the liability of bail bonds, sureties shall also be discharged. 17. Pending IA’s if any stands disposed of. 18. Let a copy of this judgment along with trial court record be sent to the trial court for information and needful. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated : 17.01.2025 Abha/NAFR