Ram Sunder Mahto & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 503 of 2003
[From the Judgement and Order dated 12.08.2002 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. 645 of 1987]
[From the Judgement and Order dated 12.08.2002 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. 645 of 1987]
Petitioner: Ram Sunder Mahto & Ors.
Respondent: State of Bihar
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 503 of 2003
[From the Judgement and Order dated 12.08.2002 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. 645 of 1987]
[From the Judgement and Order dated 12.08.2002 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. 645 of 1987]
Judges: V.S. Sirpurkar & Deepak Verma, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Oct 07, 2009
Appearances:
Appearances
Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Mr. C. Selvaraj, Advocates for the Appellant(s).
Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Mr. C. Selvaraj, Advocates for the Appellant(s).
Mr. Anuj Prakash, Mr. Gopal Singh, Advocates for the Respondent(s).
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAWS
Penal Code, 1860
Section 395 – Dacoity – Loss of Rs. 2,860/-, one lota and glass – Trial Court, after considering their identification in TIP and evidence led, convicting 11 out of 14 persons – High Court allowing the appeal of five persons on the ground that they were very old and they have already undergone some sentence – Remaining accused remained in jail for one year – Accused 78, 73, 68 and 58 years old – During dacoity two persons were injured – Those who caused injury did not file appeal – Appellant had not caused injury to anyone. Held on facts and circumstances, sentence reduced to three years.
Penal Code, 1860
Section 395 – Dacoity – Loss of Rs. 2,860/-, one lota and glass – Trial Court, after considering their identification in TIP and evidence led, convicting 11 out of 14 persons – High Court allowing the appeal of five persons on the ground that they were very old and they have already undergone some sentence – Remaining accused remained in jail for one year – Accused 78, 73, 68 and 58 years old – During dacoity two persons were injured – Those who caused injury did not file appeal – Appellant had not caused injury to anyone. Held on facts and circumstances, sentence reduced to three years.
JUDGEMENT:
V.S. SIRPURKAR, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the four accused persons who have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 395, Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. Considering their identification in the test identification parade and the evidence led before the trial court, the trial court convicted 11 persons out of 14 accused persons and awarded life sentence for their offence. These 11 accused persons having appealed before the High Court, the High Court allowed the appeal of five persons namely Panchu Mahto, Bilas Baitha, Thaga Mahto, Deo Narain Mahto and Ganeshi Mahto and acquitted them. The High Court took the view that they being very old, they should be sentenced only to suffer rigorous imprisonment which they had already undergone. Two other accused were let off on undergone sentence.
1.1. After the dismissal of the appeal, these accused persons were taken into custody and remained behind bars for about one year. Learned counsel for the appellant argues before us that the loot was relatively insignificant as it was only of Rs. 2860/- cash, one lota and one glass. It is also pointed out that now the accused persons namely Ram Sunder Mahto, Ram Lagan Mahto, Bindeshwar Mahto and Ram Ekbal Mahto are 78, 73, 68 and 58 years of age respectively .
2. Considering the overall circumstance, we are of the opinion that the accused persons deserves lenient treatment. In that, we have considered that the 28 years have already elapsed since the offence took place and the accused persons are suffering for all those 28 years. It was pointed out before us by the State counsel that during the course of the dacoity two persons have been injured and have suffered injuries by fire-arm. However, we are informed that the person who had handled fire-arm though was convicted has not filed any appeal, i.e. Arun Kumar Singh, the original A-2. Considering the evidence we find that all these accused persons might have been present during the dacoity but have not caused any injury to any witnesses. In that view of the matter we reduce the sentence which has been awarded by the High court to that of three years.
3. With this modification, the appeal is dismissed. The bail bonds of the accused appellants are cancelled. The appellants are directed to surrender within two weeks from today to serve out the remaining sentence failing which the non-bailable warrants shall be issued against them by the concerned court for their arrest.
**********
1. This appeal is filed by the four accused persons who have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 395, Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. Considering their identification in the test identification parade and the evidence led before the trial court, the trial court convicted 11 persons out of 14 accused persons and awarded life sentence for their offence. These 11 accused persons having appealed before the High Court, the High Court allowed the appeal of five persons namely Panchu Mahto, Bilas Baitha, Thaga Mahto, Deo Narain Mahto and Ganeshi Mahto and acquitted them. The High Court took the view that they being very old, they should be sentenced only to suffer rigorous imprisonment which they had already undergone. Two other accused were let off on undergone sentence.
1.1. After the dismissal of the appeal, these accused persons were taken into custody and remained behind bars for about one year. Learned counsel for the appellant argues before us that the loot was relatively insignificant as it was only of Rs. 2860/- cash, one lota and one glass. It is also pointed out that now the accused persons namely Ram Sunder Mahto, Ram Lagan Mahto, Bindeshwar Mahto and Ram Ekbal Mahto are 78, 73, 68 and 58 years of age respectively .
2. Considering the overall circumstance, we are of the opinion that the accused persons deserves lenient treatment. In that, we have considered that the 28 years have already elapsed since the offence took place and the accused persons are suffering for all those 28 years. It was pointed out before us by the State counsel that during the course of the dacoity two persons have been injured and have suffered injuries by fire-arm. However, we are informed that the person who had handled fire-arm though was convicted has not filed any appeal, i.e. Arun Kumar Singh, the original A-2. Considering the evidence we find that all these accused persons might have been present during the dacoity but have not caused any injury to any witnesses. In that view of the matter we reduce the sentence which has been awarded by the High court to that of three years.
3. With this modification, the appeal is dismissed. The bail bonds of the accused appellants are cancelled. The appellants are directed to surrender within two weeks from today to serve out the remaining sentence failing which the non-bailable warrants shall be issued against them by the concerned court for their arrest.
**********
