Jharkhand High Court
Rajendra Nath Mahto @ Rajendra ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 87 of 2005
(Against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, both dated
12.01.2005, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella,
in S.T. No. 157 of 1998)
1. Rajendra Nath Mahto @ Rajendra Mahto
2. Dhasu Mahato @ Ghashu Mahato
3. Sokha Mahato @ Sokha Mahato
4. Pome Mahato
5. Bhome Mahato
6. Nakul Mahato
7. Dhano Mahto
8. Surat Mahto @ Surat ..... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
---------
For the Appellants : Mr. R.C.P. Sah, Advocate
For the Resp.-State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, APP
--------
05/ 14.08.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. An affidavit has been filed indicating therein that the appellant
No.6-Nakul Mahto has died, as such, the instant appeal is dismissed as
abated against the appellant No.6.
3. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of
conviction and the order of sentence, both dated 12.01.2005, passed by the
learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella, in S.T. No. 157 of 1998,
whereby the appellant Nos. 1 to 5 and appellant Nos. 7 & 8 were convicted
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and fine of
Rs.3000/- under Section 307/149 of the IPC and in default of payment of
fine further to undergo RI for one month and further to undergo RI for one
month and fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code
and in default of payment of fine further to undergo RI for 15 days. No
separate sentence on appellant No. 1 is passed under Section 352 of the
IPC. Further, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
4. The prosecution case in brief is that on 09.08.1997 at about
6.30 A.M., when the informant along with his brother were ploughing their
filed then all of a sudden all the appellants armed with gun, tangi, lathi,
farsa etc. came there and assaulted the informant party whereby the brother
of the informant sustained injuries on head elbow and the right wrist. On
alarm, the other witnesses came at place of occurrence and the accused
persons fled away.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants
have falsely been implicated in this case. There are contradictory
depositions in the prosecution case. He submits that the conviction and
sentences passed by the learned trial court is contrary to the settled
principle of law.
Learned Counsel, after the aforesaid argument made an alternative
prayer on the question of sentence and submits that the incident is of the
year 1997 and the appellants have suffered the mental agony due to
ongoing litigation and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court may kindly, at least, modify the sentence for the period
already undergone as surviving appellants are middle aged persons and
they remained in custody for some days and never misused the privilege of
bail and further the surviving appellants are having no criminal
antecedents.
6. Learned APP opposed the prayer for acquittal and submits that
the learned trial court has not committed any error in convicting the
appellants. However, he fairly submits that as per record, there is no any
criminal antecedents of the appellants; as such, if the sentence is modified,
then the same should be modified in lieu of fine.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going
through the impugned judgment and the documents available on LCR, and
looking to the comprehensive facts and circumstances of the case and the
deposition of the prosecution witnesses who have considerably proved the
case of the prosecution and the findings of the trial court; this Court is not
inclined to interfere with the Judgment of conviction and thus the same is
sustained.
8. Now coming to the alternative argument of learned counsel for
the appellants with respect to sentence awarded to them; this Court is of the
view that at this stage remitting the appellants to the rigors of imprisonment
at this juncture of their life would not serve the ends of justice and
admittedly the surviving appellants remained in custody for about some
days but never misused the privilege of bail.
9. Thus, on point of sentence, looking to the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and also the fact that the alleged incident took
place in the year 1997 and about 26 years have passed and that period is
sufficient to exhaust anybody mentally, physically and economically and
the appellants were also in jail for some time and they have never misused
the privilege of bail and now they are not involved in any criminal
activities; thus, they have a chance to reform.
10. Taking into consideration of mitigating circumstances, I am of
considered view that without interfering with the judgment of conviction,
the sentence ought to be modified to the extent that the appellants shall be
released for the period already undergone but subject to payment of fine of
Rs.3,500/-.
11. As a result, the sentence as ordered by the learned trial court is
hereby modified to the extent that the surviving appellants are sentenced
for the period already undergone subject to payment of fine of Rs.3,500/-.
12. It is made clear that the surviving appellants shall pay the
aforesaid fine of Rs.3,500/-, within a period of 4 months from the date of
receipt of copy of this order, before the D.L.S.A., Seraikella; failing which
they shall serve rest of the sentence as ordered by the learned trial court.
13. With the aforesaid observations, directions and modification in
sentence only, the instant criminal appeal stands disposed of.
14. The appellants shall be discharged from the liability of their
bail bonds, subject to fulfillment of aforesaid condition.
15. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the trial court,
Secretary, D.L.S.A., Seraikella and also to the appellants through the
officer-in-charge of concerned police station.
16. Let the lower court record be sent to the court concerned
forthwith.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Pramanik/
