Ram Sunder Mahto & Ors vs State Of Bihar

RAM SUNDER MAHTO & ORS. ... Appellant(s)

Versus STATE OF BIHAR ... Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

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 -2-

undergone. Two other accused were let off on undergone

sentence.

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 lienent

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

-3-

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.

...................J. (V.S.SIRPURKAR)

....................J. (DEEPAK VERMA)

New Delhi, October 07, 2009.