Sanjay Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4536 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sanjay Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 April, 2025

Author: Sanjay Prasad

Bench: Sanjay Prasad

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
           Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 809 of 2024
                          With
                 I.A. No.11829 of 2024
                        ---------

     Sanjay Mahto                    ..... Appellant
                        Versus
     The State of Jharkhand          ..... Respondent
                        ----------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

----------

For the Appellant : Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P.

----------

07/03.04.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the Appellant challenging the Judgment of conviction dated 05.10.2024 and sentence dated 09.10.2024, passed by Shri Abhimanyu Kumar, learned Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO Act, Palamau at Daltonganj in Special POCSO Case No.08 of 2023, by which the Appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 363 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Seven (07) years and to pay the fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand).

However, the learned Court below has acquitted the Appellant and the Co-convict Basant Mahto for the offence under Section 376 DA & 506 of I.P.C. & Sec.6 r/w Section 5(g) of the POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(w) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Heard Mr.Sheo Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

3. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that four persons, namely Sanjay Mahto, i.e. the Appellant, Amit Mahto, Akbar Mahfooj Alam and Basant Mahto (Co- convict) had abducted the victim (name not disclosed in

view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Nipun Saxena and another v. Union of India and others"

reported in (2019) 2 Supreme Court Cases 703) and got administered intoxicating substance in her mouth and had taken her to the jungle and had committed gang rape on her one by one.

4. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed under Section 430 (i) of BNSS, 2023 for bail during pendency of this Criminal Appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Court below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that there is delay of Three (03) days in lodging the F.I.R. It is submitted that there is contradiction in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. It is submitted that the Appellant has been falsely implicated at the instance of the father of the victim girl. Learned counsel for the Appellant has read the entire judgment, particularly the concluding paragraphs, i.e. from Para 31 to 40 and as such the same is not being discussed in order to avoid repetition, however, it is further submitted that the Investigating Officer had also not found and seized the blood stained clothes of the victim girl and also not found any condom used by the Appellant and the Co-convict. It has further been submitted that the Doctor had not found any sign of rape on the victim girl in the Medical Report. It is further submitted that Co-convict, namely Basant Mahto, has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Navneet Kumar, as His Lordship then was) of this Court in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 743 of 2024 and the case of the Appellant falls on the same and similar footing. It is submitted that the Appellant has been in

custody since 17.12.2022 and hence, the Appellant may be enlarged on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there is sufficient evidence against the Appellant for committing rape upon the victim girl. It is submitted that the victim girl has supported the allegation of rape in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and before the Police and even during her evidence before the learned Court below and hence, the prayer for bail may be rejected.

7. Perused the Lower Court Record and considered the submission of both sides and also the Order dated 05.03.2025, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Navneet Kumar, as His Lordship then was) of this Court in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 743 of 2024.

8. From perusal of the Lower Court Record, it appears that there is direct allegation made by the victim girl against the appellant along with three other persons, namely Amit Mahto, Akbar Mahfooj Alam and Basant Mahto (Co-convict) for committing gang rape on her in the jungle one by one.

9. The Lower Court Record reveals that the offence had taken place on 11.12.2022, however, the Doctor had examined the victim girl on 15.12.2022, i.e. after delay of four days and thus, no evidence of rape was found on her person as she has been examined at a much later date.

10. It also appears that the victim girl, during her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., had fully supported the allegation of rape and abduction committed by the Appellant and other co-accused persons.

11. It also appears during course of hearing that this is a case of poor conducting of trial by the learned Court below and even the learned A.P.P. was not sincere in conducting the trial despite availability of certain documents on record, including the date of birth certificate, which, if marked as Exhibit, could have revealed that the Informant belonged to Schedule Caste community.

12. Though the defence has taken during cross-examination from the Investigation Officer regarding non-seizure of clothes wore by the victim girl at the time of offence, but there is nothing on record that it was called for by the Police.

13. Therefore, this Court finds that the Investigating Officer was very casual in conducting the investigation and so was the attitude of the learned A.P.P. during Trial.

14. So far as the grant of bail to the co-convict is concerned, it appears that the learned Co-ordinate Bench has discussed nothing regarding the evidence of the victim girl and also the statement of the parent of the victim girl and also the evidence of other prosecution witnesses, namely P.W.1, P.W.3, P.W.4, i.e. father of the victim, mother of the victim and cousin sister of the victim, respectively.

15. Therefore, This Court respectfully differs from the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Navneet Kumar, as His Lordship then was) of this Court in Order dated 05.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 743 of 2024, vide which Co-convict Basant Mahto has been released on bail, as apart from discussing the argument of the leaned Senior counsel appearing for the Co-convict, namely Basant Mahto in the said case, no

finding has been given for grant of bail to Co-convict by the Co-ordinate Bench.

16 It appears from the evidence of the victim girl that initially Appellant-Sanjay Mahto had caught hold of the victim girl and then other accused persons arrived. Thereafter, the Appellant-Sanjay Mahto had administered one tablet forcibly in the mouth of the victim girl and due to which she became unconscious and which has also been stated by the victim girl during her evidence as P.W.2 before the Court below.

17. There is specific evidence on record that blood was oozing out from the private parts of the victim girl and which is also stated by the victim girl while examined as P.W.2 and also corroborated by her mother P.W.3.

It further reveals from the evidence of the P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.5 that the victim girl was recovered from the jungle, still the Court below had acquitted the Appellant and another Co-convict under Section 376 DA of I.P.C. and Section 5(g) of the POCSO Act for want of evidence.

18. Accordingly, the prayer for bail made by the learned counsel is rejected.

19. Thus, this I.A. No.11829 of 2024 is hereby rejected.

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) s.m.