REPORTABLE

       IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL  APPEAL No.503 OF 2003        

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.