DWARIKA MAHTO, PRASANNA MAHTO AND MAHITOSH MAHTO Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND) AND KHAGEN MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By Court: This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.06.2000 passed by the learned 2nd Assistant Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 1995 / 211 of 1995 convicting the Appellants under Ss. 366(A)/34 and 368/34 Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for nine years under Sec. 366(A)/34 Indian Penal Code and R.I. for seven years under Sec. 368/34 Indian Penal Code. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants, submitted that the main accused in this case is Umesh Mahto who has been released after serving out the sentence and the Appellants were involved in this case only because the Appellant No. 1 -Dwarika Mahto happens to be the father of Umesh Mahto and Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 Prasanna Mahto and Mahitosh Mahto happens to be relatives of Umesh Mahto and they are alleged to have assisted Umesh Mahto in committing the crime by confining the victim -Chhaya Kumari Mahto, a minor girl, and coercing her to marry Umesh Mahto and not producing Umesh Mahto and victim -Chhaya Kumari Mahto before the panchayati. He further submitted that in any event, the Appellant No. 1 -Dwarika Mahto may be about 66 years of age by now and Appellant No. 2 -Prasanna Mahto may be about 71 years of age by now and the Appellants have suffered this prosecution since 1993. He further submitted that the ingredients of Ss. 366(A) and 368 Indian Penal Code are not made out, so far as these Appellants are concerned.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment.