Jharkhand High Court
Dhani Lal Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 107 of 2005
---------
(Against the judgment of conviction dated 18.09.2004 and order
of sentence dated 20.09.2004 passed by learned Additional
Judicial Commissioner, FTC Xth, Ranchi corresponding to S.T.
No.94/02 T.R. No.246/2003.)
-------
Dhani Lal Mahto ..... .... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ..... .... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
-------
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent-State :Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P
.........
08/29.08.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred
against the judgment of conviction dated 18.09.2004 and order
of sentence dated 20.09.2004 passed by learned Additional
Judicial Commissioner, FTC Xth, Ranchi corresponding to S.T.
No.94/02 T.R. No.246/2003, whereby the appellant has been
convicted for the offence under Sections 376/511 of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of Five years with a fine of
Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo
S.I. for a period of three months.
3. The brief fact of the case is that on 03.11.2001 at
about 7 p.m. evening when the informant came out from her
house for water, suddenly the appellant came there and gagged
her mouth with her duppata and forcibly lifted and carried her
to his incomplete Indra Awash building and attempted to
commit rape but on her cry her mother and cousin rushed there
then the appellant fled away.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has
made the following submissions:-
(i) The present case has been lodged due to non-
fulfillment of illegal demand and previous enmity.
(ii) Most of the prosecution witnesses are relatives of the
informant party, as such they are highly interested witnesses.
After the aforesaid submission, he further made an
alternative argument that the incident is of the year 2001 and
the appellant has 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 the appellant is aged about 44
years and he also remained in custody for about 9 months.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of the learned
counsel for the appellant and submits that the learned trial
court has not committed any error in convicting the appellant.
However, he fairly submits that as per record, there is no any
criminal antecedents of the appellant; as such, if the sentence is
modified, then the same should be modified in lieu of fine.
6. 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 does not suffer
from any infirmity as such, this Court is not inclined to interfere
with the Judgment of conviction and thus the same is
sustained.
7. Now coming to the alternative argument of learned
counsel for the appellant with respect to sentence awarded to
him; this Court is of the view that at this stage remitting the
appellant to the rigors of imprisonment at this juncture of his
life would not serve the ends of justice and admittedly the
appellant remained in custody for about 9 months.
8. 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 2001 and about 22 years
have passed and that period is sufficient to exhaust anybody
mentally, physically and economically and the appellant has
also remained in jail for about 9 months and he has never
misused the privilege of bail and there is a chance to reform
him.
9. 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 appellant shall be released for
the period already undergone, but subject to payment of fine of
Rs.30,000/- looking to the nature of offence.
As a result, the sentence as ordered by the learned
trial court is hereby modified to the extent that the appellant is
sentenced for the period already undergone subject to payment
of fine of Rs.30,000/-.
It is made clear that the appellant shall pay the
aforesaid fine of Rs.30,000/- within a period of 6 months from
the date of receipt of this order, before the D.L.S.A., Ranchi;
failing which he shall serve rest of the sentence as ordered by
the learned trial court.
10. With the aforesaid observations, directions and
modification in sentence only, the instant criminal appeal
stands disposed of.
11. The appellant shall be discharged from the liability
of his bail bonds, subject to fulfillment of aforesaid condition.
12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the trial
court, Secretary, DLSA Ranchi and the LCR be sent back to the
court concerned forthwith.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Fahim/-
