CRL.A. NO. 190 OF 2006

PART-II

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 190 OF 2006

GANGA SAGAR YADAV ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF JHARKHAND ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R

 This appeal has been filed through the Supreme  

Court  Legal  Services  Committee  on  behalf  of  the  

appellant  who  stands  convicted  for  an  offence  

punishable under Section 376/34 of the Indian Penal  

Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 years  

and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to  

undergo  simple  imprisonment  for  six  months.   This  

appeal is directed against the concurrent orders of  

conviction made by the trial court as well as the High  

Court.

CRL.A. NO. 190 OF 2006

We have gone through  the judgments of the trial  

court  as  well  as  the  High  Court  and  find  that  the  

prosecution story rests primarily on the statement of  

P.W. 9 the prosecutrix who was then 18 years of age.  

We  have absolutely no reason whatsoever to disbelieve  

her statement.  Her statement finds support from the  

evidence of P.Ws. 5 and 6 and from the medical evidence  

which supports the prosecution story in its entirity.   

Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary, the learned counsel  

for the appellant has, however, pointed out that the  

appellant had been arrested on 22nd September, 1999 and  

had, accordingly, undergone more than 10 years of the  

sentence but was still continuing to languish in jail  

for reasons unknown.   

After having heard the learned counsel for the  

parties and having carefully perused the record we find  

that it is indeed correct that the appellant had been  

arrested on 22nd September, 1999 and has been in jail  

ever  since.   Even  assuming  that  he  may  have  been  

released  on  parole,  which  period  would  have  to  be  

deducted  from  his  total  sentence,  yet  it  is  also  

possible that he would have earned some remissions as

CRL.A. NO. 190 OF 2006

well.  In any case, it is apparent from the record that  

the appellant would have almost completed the sentence  

by now.

We are, therefore, of the opinion that the ends  

of justice would be met if the appeal is allowed to the  

extent that the sentence imposed on the appellant is  

reduced to that already undergone by him.  We order,  

accordingly.

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [DEEPAK VERMA]

NEW DELHI NOVEMBER 24, 2009.      

CRL.A. NO. 190 OF 2006

 PART-I

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 190 OF 2006

GANGA SAGAR YADAV ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF JHARKHAND ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R

   We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Vide  our  separate  reasoned  order,  we  have  

allowed  the  appeal  to  the  extent  that  the  sentence  

imposed on the appellant is reduced to that already  

undergone by him.   

It  is  stated  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

appellant that the appellant is in jail. We direct that  

he  be  set  at  liberty  forthwith  if  not  required  in  

connection  with  any  other  case.    

The reasoned order to follow.   

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [DEEPAK VERMA]

NEW DELHI

CRL.A. NO. 190 OF 2006

NOVEMBER 24, 2009.