GAYATRI SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Asif Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 27.09.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2000/ 28 of 2003 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum Fast Track Court II at Bermo, Tenughat, whereby and whereunder, the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 08.02.2002 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo, Tenughat, in G.R. Case No. 456 of 1996 (T.R. No. 186 of of 2000), convicting the petitioner for the offences punishable u/s 467, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, has been affirmed only with respect to Section 420 I.P.C., whereas the sentence imposed on her of R.I. for 7 years has also been affirmed.

(3.) It has been stated by Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner that the main accused in this case is J. K. Prasad and the petitioner has been convicted only on account of the fact that she is the wife of J. K. Prasad. It has also been stated that no amount was withdrawn in terms of Ext. 3, 4 and 5 by the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the entire conviction is based upon the evidence of P.W. 3 and in absence of any corroboration, such evidence should not have been relied upon either by the trial court or by the learned appellate court. An alternative argument has been put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner that considering the fact that the petitioner is facing rigours of prosecution case for more than two decades and she has remained in custody for some time, the period of sentence be suitably modified, if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction.