2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.359 of 2008 …… [Against the Judgment of conviction dated 21.01.2008 and Order of sentence dated 22.01.2008, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Dhanbad in S.T. No.258 of 2005)] …… Aman Khan @ Md. Aman Khan, Son of Late Akhtar, resident of Chirkunda, P.S. – Chirkunda, District – Dhanbad. … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … Respondent ------ For the Appellant : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Adv. For the State : Mr. Bishwambhar Shastri, A.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA JUDGMENT Dated - 10.06.2026 By Court:- Heard Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Instant criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment of conviction dated 21.01.2008 and order of sentence dated 22.01.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Dhanbad in S.T. No.258 of 2005, whereby and whereunder the appellant 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 2 has been held guilty for the offences under Sections 306 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation for the offence under Section 306 of the I.P.C.; S.I. for one year for the offence under Section 509 of the I.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run separately. 3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal as emerging from the fardbeyan of Rita Kumari (deceased) recorded on 23.11.2004 at B.P. Niyogi Hospital, Maithan, is that the accused Md. Aman (appellant) had been persistently harassing and teasing deceased while she was attending school and had repeatedly threatened to kill her and her family members if she refused to marry with him. The deceased consistently declined his proposal. It is further alleged that on 22.11.2004 at about 05:00 p.m., the accused, accompanied by 3–4 other persons, again came and threatened her to marry with him. The deceased disclosed these incidents to her family members. It is further alleged that owing to the continuous harassment and intimidation by the accused, Rita Kumari poured kerosene oil upon herself and set herself ablaze after closing the door of her room. On hearing her cries, villagers rushed to rescue her and she was 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 3 taken for medical treatment. The aforesaid statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer during her treatment and forms the basis of the prosecution case. On the basis of above fardbeyan, Chirkunda P.S. Case No.216 of 2004 was registered for the offences under Sections 509 and 306/511 of the I.P.C. 4. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant for the offences under Sections 509 and 306 of the I.P.C. and accordingly, cognizance was taken and subsequently, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed against the appellant which was read over and explained to him for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. In the course of trial, altogether nine witnesses were examined and several documentary evidences were also adduced by the prosecution. 6. On the other hand, one oral evidence as well as documentary evidence has been adduced by the defence. 7. After conclusion of trial, impugned judgment and order has been passed which has been assailed in this appeal. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant without touching the merits of the judgment has confined himself towards the 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 4 quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant. It is submitted that appellant has been held guilty for the offences under Sections 306 and 509 of the I.P.C. The maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant for the offence under Section 306 of the I.P.C. is R.I. for five years out of which, he has already undergone about four years and nine months' custody during the pendency of trial and post-conviction and has sufficiently been punished. This was appellant's first offence and the incident was of the year 2004 and now more than two decades have been elapsed. Therefore, sentence passed by the learned Trial Court may be reduced from five years to the imprisonment already undergone. 9. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has defended the impugned judgment on merits. So far as quantum of sentence is concerned, no serious objection has been raised. 10. I have gone through the impugned judgment and order along with the record of the case in the light of rival contentions of the learned counsel for the respective parties. 11. It appears that altogether nine witnesses were examined by the prosecution to substantiate the charges levelled against accused. Out of them P.W.1 Dr. Neetu Singh is the doctor 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 5 who first treated the deceased. She has deposed that victim was conscious and fit to make a statement when admitted to B.P. Niyogi Hospital. She found burn injuries on her body and detected smell of kerosene oil, thereby lending support to the dying declaration. P.W.2 Sunita Kumari is the sister of the deceased victim. She has stated that upon searching for Rita Kumari, she found her in a burnt condition after she had poured kerosene oil upon herself. She further supported the prosecution case regarding the persistent teasing and harassment by the accused. P.W.3 Guria Kumari is also sister of the deceased victim. She has corroborated the testimony of P.W.2 and supported the prosecution version regarding the conduct of the accused and the circumstances leading to the suicide. P.W.4 Smt. Shyama Devi is the mother of the deceased victim. She has supported the dying declaration and stated that her daughter had informed her that she did not want to marry the accused, who had been threatening to kill her family members. According to her, such continuous harassment drove the deceased to commit suicide. 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 6 P.W.5 Durga Sharma is the independent witness and owner of the garage where the father of the deceased victim was working. He has deposed that he accompanied the father of the deceased to the hospital, where victim disclosed to him the circumstances under which she had set herself on fire and attributed the same to the conduct of the accused. P.W.6 Arjun Vishwakarma is the father of the deceased. He has stated that upon reaching the hospital, his daughter narrated the entire occurrence to him, including the threats and harassment extended by the accused. His testimony substantially supports the dying declaration. P.W.7 Dayanand Tiwary has stated that deceased was in conscious state when he reached to the hospital. Thereafter, asking from victim, victim disclosed entire circumstances under which she had set herself on fire. He recorded the fardbeyan of the deceased at the hospital and proved the same during trial, thereby establishing the authenticity of the dying declaration. P.W.8 Sripriyan Bage (A.S.I.) is the Investigating Officer of the case. He investigated the case, inspected the place of occurrence, collected relevant materials, proved the 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 7 post-mortem report and upon completion of investigation, submitted the charge-sheet against the accused. P.W.9 Mishir Oraon recorded dying declaration of deceased. He deposed that the statement of victim was recorded while she was conscious and in a fit state of mind. He proved the fardbeyan and the FIR, thereby supporting the prosecution’s reliance on the dying declaration as the foundation of the case. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, genesis and manner of occurrence under which the offence was committed by appellant, the incident, which is of the year 2004 and the custody of appellant which he has undergone for about out four years and nine months, out of five years' imprisonment. It appears in the expedient of justice to reduce the sentence of imprisonment already undergone by him. Therefore, the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him with direction to deposit fine amount already awarded by learned Trial Court, if already not deposited. 13. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed on merits with modification in sentence. The fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, if 2026:JHHC:16750 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.359 of 2008 Page | 8 not, deposited by the appellant will be realized by the concerned learned Trial Court in accordance with law. 14. The appellant is on bail, hence, he is discharged from the liability of bail bond. The sureties are also discharged. 15. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. 16. Let a copy of this judgment along with Trial Court record be sent back immediately to the concerned Trial Court for information and needful. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated: 10/06/2026 Sachin / NAFR Uploaded On: 12/06/2026