Patna High Court
Chandan Sah vs The State Of Bihar on 8 January, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.425 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Buxar
======================================================
Chandan Sah, S/O- Late Madan Sah, Resident of Village- Koransarai, P.S.-
Koransarai, District- Buxar.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Baby Devi, Wife of Kashinath Sharma, R/O Vill.- Koransarai, P.S.-
Koransarai, Dist.- Buxar.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, Addl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 08-01-2025
Heard Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned counsel for the
appellant and Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellant in this case has challenged the
judgment dated 05.03.2021 (hereinafter referred to as the
'impugned judgment') and the order dated 09.03.2021 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'impugned order') passed by the learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge,
POCSO Act, Buxar (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned trial
court') in POCSO case No. 54 of 2018, arising out of Buxar
(Mahila) P.S Case No. 75 of 2018 dated 18.09.2018 registered
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
2/22
under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 376/34 of the Indian Penal
Code (in short 'IPC') and Section 6 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act (in short 'POCSO Act').
3. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial court has
held the appellant guilty of the offence of rape as defined under
Section 376 of the IPC. The learned trial court having convicted
the appellant for the said offence imposed upon the appellant
sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) for the offence
committed under Section 376 IPC and in default of payment of
fine, he will undergo further six months of simple imprisonment.
The appellant has been further sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for twelve years and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) under Section 4 of the POCSO
Act. In default of payment of fine imposed, he shall undergo six
months of simple imprisonment.
4. Although, the appellant has been found guilty under
Sections 341, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC but according to the
learned trial court, these offences have been committed in order to
commit the main offence of rape and penetrative sexual assault on
the victim. Therefore, no further punishment is required to be
awarded to the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
3/22
Prosecution Case
5. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of the
victim (X) aged about 14 years recorded by the S.H.O. of Mahila
Police Station Buxar (PW-6) on 18.09.2018 at 3:00 AM at Mahila
Police Station, Buxar. In her fardbeyan, the victim has alleged as
under :-
While she was going alone to see Vishwakarma Pooja on
17.09.2018
at around 7:00 PM, in the meantime, her co-villager
Chandan Sah (appellant) came there and forcibly made her to sit
on his motorcycle by grabbing her mouth and took her to a lonely
place around bushes where he removed her jeans and committed
rape on her. When the victim cried and raised protest, the appellant
threatened her that if she would tell this to anyone in her home he
will shoot her and her family members. Thereafter, he dropped her
near her house by his motorcycle and fled away. The victim
narrated the whole incident to her step-mother who informed about
the incident to her uncle and grandmother. When her mother and
uncle went to the house of the appellant and told about the incident
to mother and sister of the appellant, they threatened them to
falsely implicate the informant’s side in rape case. Thereafter, the
present case was lodged.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
4/22
6. Upon investigation of the case, the I.O. has found
sufficient materials to proceed against the accused persons,
accordingly, he submitted a chargesheet against the present
appellant, his mother and sister for the offences under Sections
341, 323, 504, 506, 376/34 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO
Act. The learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Buxar took
cognizance of the offences vide order dated 02.01.2019. The
charges were explained to the accused persons who denied the
charges and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the learned trial court
framed charges under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 and 376 of the
IPC as also under Section 6 of the POCSO Act on 27.08.2019
against the appellant. So far as the other accused were concerned,
against them charges were framed under Sections 341, 323, 504
and 506 of IPC. In ultimate analysis of the evidences on the record
while the appellant has been convicted, the other two accused have
been acquitted of the charges against them.
7. On behalf of the prosecution as many as seven
witnesses have been examined. The defence examined one
witness, namely, Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari. The complete
description of the prosecution witnesses whose oral testimonies
have been recorded by the learned trial court and the documentary
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
5/22
evidences proved on behalf of the prosecution are provided
hereunder in tabular form for ready reference :-
List of Prosecution Witnesses
PW-1 Victim
PW-2 Bharat Sharma
PW-3 Baby Devi
PW-4 Dr. Madhu Singh
PW-5 Dr. Yogendra Kumar
PW-6 Kanchan Kumari
PW-7 Shivmitra ChaudharyList of Exhibits on behalf of Prosecution
Exhibit-1 Signature of victim on Fardbeyan
Exhibit-1/A Signature of witness -Baby Devi on Fardbeyan
Exhibit- 1/B Signature of witness Bharat Sharma on Fardbeyan
Exhibit-2 Signature of Victim on Seizure list
Exhibit-3 Signature of Victim on 164 Cr.P.C.
Exhibit-4 Signature of Victim on Seizure list
Exhibit-2/A Signature of witness Bharat Sharma on Seizure list
Exhibit-5 Signature of witness Baby Debi on Medical Report
Exhibit-6 Signature of Witness Baby Devi on Seizure list
Exhibit-7 Injury report
Exhibit- 8 X-ray Report
Exhibit- 9 FSL Report
Exhibit-10 Writing of P.S. Written on F.I.R
Exhibit-10/1 Writing of Fardbeyan
Exhibit-10/2 Signature of S.H.O.
Registration of F.I.R
Exhibit- 10/3 Signature of Kanchan Kumari on Fardbeyan
Exhibit- 10/4 Signature of the SHO on back side of F.I.R
Exhibit-11 Original FSL Report-1
Exhibit-11/1 Original FSL Report-2
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
6/22
8. After recording of the prosecution evidences,
statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section
313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘CrPC‘) on
05.01.2021. The appellant denied the correctness of the
incriminating circumstances upon him and came out with a plea
that he has been falsely implicated in this case.
Findings of the Learned Trial Court
9. The learned trial court examined the oral testimonies
and the documentary evidences led on behalf of the prosecution
and further considered the defence of the accused – appellant. The
learned trial court came to a finding that the victim in this case was
aged between 14 and 16 years at the time of occurrence. In her
statement under Section 164 CrPC, she disclosed her age as 13
years. In her evidence, she has stated her age as 14 years but no
question has been put to her regarding her age by the defence
counsel in suggestion. PW-3, who is mother of the victim, has
stated her age as 14 years but even she has not been cross-
examined on this point and no suggestion has been given. The
learned trial court, therefore, concluded that the victim was
certainly aged between 14 and 16 years, therefore, as defined
under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act, she would be a child within
the meaning of the said Act and the provision of the POCSO Act
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
7/22
would be attracted. Learned trial court found that apart from the
oral testimony of the victim, the medical report of the victim
(Exhibit-7) which has been proved by Dr. Madhu Singh (PW-4)
would show that hymen of the victim was found ruptured, red and
inflamed, posterior part of labia minora was also red and inflamed
and the doctor has opined that she had sexual act in recent past
(within 12 to 48 hours). The learned trial court, therefore, held that
it proves the occurrence, an injury of rape on the body of victim.
The incident of rape was committed on 17.09.2018 while the
medical examination of the victim was done on the next date i.e.
on 18.09.2018, therefore, the medical report corroborates the
incident of rape with the victim.
10. In the learned trial court, the defence raised a plea of
delay of eight hours in filing of the FIR. It was argued that as per
the FIR (Exhibit-1) and the statement of the victim under Section
164 CrPC (Exhibit-3), the incident of rape had occurred on
17.09.2018 at about 07:00 PM whereas the FIR in the matter was
registered on the next day at 03:00 AM. The learned trial court
having examined the materials on the record found that the victim
in this case is aged about 13 years, the incident had taken place on
17.09.2018 at 07:00 PM and just thereafter the victim informed the
incident to her mother, thereafter, the matter was reported to police
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
8/22
and the FIR was registered at 03:00 AM on the next day i.e. on
18.09.2018. In the opinion of the learned trial court, there is no
delay in reporting the case to the police in spite of number of
problems faced by the victim’s family in reporting such a heinous
offence of rape to the police.
11. Another plea taken on behalf of the defence was that
there are apparent contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses. The learned trial court has dealt with this with reference
to various paragraphs of the testimonies of the victim. It has been
found that the pattern of cross-examination by the defence
indicates that the defence wanted to show that everything was
consensual but the learned trial court having found that the victim
who was a girl below 16 years of age and she was not in a position
to give her consent, the plea of the defence would not be
acceptable.
12. Referring to the presumption of culpability as
contained under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, the learned trial
court held that the defence could not discharge it’s burden. The
another plea taken on behalf of the defence was that the accused
has been falsely implicated in this case on account of previous
land dispute. On this point, the learned trial court found that no
document has been brought in support of such dispute. PW-2 was
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
9/22
suggested in paragraph ’11’ and ’12’ of the cross-examination that
to usurp the land of accused, this wrong case has been filed. PW-3
was suggested differently in paragraph ’15’ that because the victim
is the step-daughter of PW-3, therefore, this wrong case has been
filed against the accused. In paragraph ‘9’ of her deposition, PW-3
has shown her ignorance that 9 katthas of land of the accused
which is in front of her house, they want to usurp and for that
reason, a wrong case has been filed.
13. In its ultimate analysis, the learned trial court, as
recorded above, found that all the three ingredients of a criminal
trial i.e. (i) genesis of the occurrence, (ii) place of occurrence and
(iii) manner of occurrence, have been duly proved. The appellant
has been accordingly convicted and sentenced.
Submissions on behalf of the Appellant
14. Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned counsel for the appellant
has taken this Court through the evidences available on the record.
Once again, before us, submissions have been made with reference
to the various circumstances appearing from the evidence of the
prosecutrix that it seems to be a case of consensual act of the
victim. Learned counsel submits that the victim (PW-1) has stated
that when she was going to visit Vishwakarma Puja on 17.09.2018
at 07:00 PM, this appellant came on a black coloured motorcycle,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
10/22
stopped her on way, gagged her by mouth and made her to sit on
the motorcycle whereafter, he took her to the bushes at a lonely
place, opened her jeans and committed wrong act with her. It is
submitted that the victim had gone on the motorcycle of the
appellant and it could not have been possible for the appellant to
drive the vehicle as well as to control the victim in a manner so
that she could not have raised any hue and cry, still the victim did
not raise hulla. She has stated that when she was made to sit on the
motorcycle, she had placed her hand on the seat. When she was
going to visit the Vishwakarma Puja, the other villagers were also
going on the road but no one tried to save her. In these
circumstances, the statement of victim that she was grabbed by her
mouth and forcibly made to sit on the motorcycle would not be
believable. Learned counsel submits that on a complete reading of
the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW-1), it would appear that she is
not a credible witness much less a sterling witness, as such, it
would not be safe to convict the appellant on the basis of her
testimony.
15. Learned counsel further submits that though the
victim is said to be a minor, below 16 years of age, but the
prosecution has not brought, in fact, any evidence on the record to
prove her age, therefore, the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
11/22
could not have usurped the jurisdiction to try this case as the basic
foundation to bring home the case under Section 29 of the POCSO
Act are not available in this case.
16. Referring to the medical evidence on the record
proved by Dr. Madhu Singh (PW-4), learned counsel submits that
in her cross-examination, PW-4 has stated that the kind of external
injuries found on the private part of the victim may happen due to
the effect of some insect bite. Learned counsel submits that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in this case on account of
land dispute and the defence case setup in course of cross-
examination of PW-2 and PW-3 is consistent.
17. It is lastly submitted that at the stage of Section 313
CrPC while recording the statement of the appellant, the entire
incriminating materials which were brought by the prosecution in
course of trial were not placed before him which has caused
serious prejudice to the appellant. Referring to question no. 2
recorded in the statement under Section 313 CrPC, learned counsel
would submit that in fact question no. 2 should have been divided
into two parts but a composite question was put to the appellant,
which is not the correct way to provide appropriate opportunity to
an accused to explain the circumstances. It is his submission that
in such circumstance where the accused has not been provided
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
12/22
proper opportunity at the stage of Section 313 CrPC, it would be
just and proper to set aside the impugned judgment and order and
remit the matter to the learned trial court for a trial afresh.
Submission on behalf of the State
18. The appeal has been opposed by Ms. Shashi Bala
Verma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Learned
Additional Public Prosecutor submits that in this case, the age of
the victim has never been questioned by the defence. The mother
of the victim (PW-3) has stated in her examination-in-chief that the
incident is of 17.09.2018 at 07:00 PM. Her daughter aged about 14
years had gone to visit the Vishwakarma Puja that day when the
occurrence took place. The victim recorded her statement under
Section 164 CrPC in which the learned Magistrate assessed her
age as 13 years and the victim claimed her age as 14 years. In
course of trial, the victim has been examined as PW-1. She has
stated her age about 14 years and she was studying in class VIII.
Defence examined PW-1 and her mother at length but did not
question the age of the victim. No suggestion was shown to the
witnesses that the victim was major on the date of occurrence. It is
submitted that Dr. Yogendra Kumar (PW-5) who was posted as
Medical Officer at Sadar hospital, Buxar and had examined the
victim girl on 18.09.2018 as a member of the Medical Board
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
13/22
deposed that according to radiological finding, age of victim is in
between 15 and 16 years. The defence cross-examined PW-5 but
did not question the opinion of the doctor with regard to the age of
the victim based on radiological findings.
19. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further
submitted that in this case, the ocular evidence of the prosecutrix
and the prosecution witnesses such as her uncle (PW-2) and
mother (PW-3) are getting fully corroborated by the medical
evidence (Exhibit ‘7’) which is medical report proved by Dr.
Madhu Singh (PW-4) and the FSL report (Exhibit ’11’ and ’11/1′).
The Doctor has clearly opined that the victim was subjected to
recent sexual act within 12-48 hours and there were injuries
present on the external part of the private part of the victim.
20. As regards the submission that the accused was not
made aware of the incriminating materials brought against him by
the prosecution at the stage of Section 313 CrPC, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the appellant admitted
before the learned trial court that he had heard the entire
deposition of the witnesses. He was apprised of the evidence on
the record that on 17.09.2018 at 07:00 PM, he had committed rape
upon the victim girl at Koransarai and he had threatened her that
she would not tell it to anyone in her home. So far as the question
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
14/22
no. 4 is concerned, the learned trial court made aware of the
circumstances brought against the accused by pointing out that he
had committed rape upon the victim knowing that she was a minor
and was aged about 13 years. It is submitted that the accused has,
though, stated that he has been falsely implicated but has not come
out with any plea that there was any land dispute between the
accused and the informant and/ or with an intention to usurp a
piece of land of the accused which is in front of the house of the
informant, he has been falsely implicated by the informant. It is,
thus, submitted that despite opportunity available to the accused to
explain the circumstances under which he could have been falsely
implicated, he has not come out with any statement in this regard.
Consideration
21. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also on going
through the entire evidences available on the record, we find that
in this case, the victim/informant has fully supported her case. She
has narrated the entire occurrence which took place on 17.09.2018
at 07:00 PM in which she was forcibly taken away by the appellant
on his motorcycle to a lonely place where this appellant committed
rape on her. PW-1 has stated that after she was left at some
distance from her house, she came her home and told the entire
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
15/22
story to her mother. She has also stated that she had told the entire
story to the Officer Incharge of the police station who recorded the
same, she had read the said recording of her statement and on
finding the same correct, she had put her signature. At her
instance, this has been marked Exhibit ‘1’. She has also identified
the signature of her mother and uncle on the fardbeyan (Exhibit
‘1’), the signatures have been marked Exhibit ‘1/A’ and Exhibit
‘1/B’ respectively. PW-1 has also proved the seizure list (Exhibit
‘2’), her statement recorded by the Magistrate (Exhibit ‘3’) and the
medical report (Exhibit ‘7’) showing her treatment by the doctors.
From the pattern of cross-examination of PW-1, it is crystal clear
that the defence has not questioned her age and minority and no
suggestion at all has been given to this witness in course of her
cross-examination that she was major. A complete reading of the
evidence of PW-1 makes this Court to believe her testimonies
beyond any doubt. She is the victim of the case and the defence
having miserably failed to create any dent in her deposition, this
witness would be put in a category of wholly reliable witness
within the meaning of Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act.
22. The uncle (PW-2) and the mother (PW-3) of the
victim have fully supported the prosecution case. PW-2 is the
uncle of the victim who was told the entire occurrence by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
16/22
victim. The defence suggested him that there is land of the accused
in front of the door of the informant. This witness expressed his
unawareness about it. The defence again suggested him that no
such occurrence had taken place and only to usurp the said land,
the informant had got lodged this case through her step-daughter.
This witness denied the suggestion. The defence has not brought
on record any document of a land to substantiate its suggestion
that the accused is holding a piece of land in front of the house of
the informant. Even the description of the land had not been
mentioned by the defence in course of trial.
23. This Court further finds that when the mother of the
victim came to be examined, the defence did not mention about the
presence of any land of the accused in front of her house. The only
suggestion given to PW-3 may be found in paragraph ’15’ of her
deposition wherein the defence suggested that the victim is her
step-daughter who is being misused against the accused persons.
This Court, therefore, agrees with the findings of the learned trial
court that the defence is not even consistent with regard to the case
of a false implication.
24. So far as the medical evidence is concerned, the
deposition of Dr. Madhu Singh (PW-4) fully corroborates the
ocular evidence. PW-4 had examined the victim as a member of
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
17/22
the Medical Board. She has proved the entire report written and
signed by her along with other members of the Board. The report
has been marked Exhibit ‘7’. The relevant part of the report
(Exhibit ‘7’) finds place in paragraph ‘1’ of the deposition of PW-4
which is being reproduced hereunder for a ready reference:-
“No external injury found on her head, neck, face,
chest, abdomen, back and limbs. Breast were developed.
Axillary & Pubic hair were present on private parts
examination hymen was found ruptured red and inflamed.
Posterior part of labia minor was also red and inflamed.
Vaginal swab taken. Vaginal swab examination report given
by Dr. Anil Kr. Singh. No spermatozoa found either alive or
dead on low and high power of microscopic examination. A
few epithelial cells are seen.”
25. PW-4 was cross-examined by the defence. In
paragraph ‘4’ of her cross-examination, she has reported that there
was external injury on the private part of the victim. She has stated
that she had not written the reason of swelling and redness and this
may happen due to any insect bite. It is this part of her cross-
examination that has been placed before this Court by learned
counsel for the appellant to submit that even the medical evidence
is not a clinching proof of the fact that the external injury present
in the private part of the victim was result of a recent sexual act.
This Court would not accept this submission of learned counsel for
the appellant for the simple reason that the entire evidence of PW-
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
18/22
4 is to be read as a whole and no part of it may be read in isolation.
PW-4 has clearly noticed on examination of the private part of the
victim that hymen was ruptured, red and inflamed. At the same
time, posterior part of labia minor was also red and inflamed. She
has clearly opined that the victim had sign of sexual act in recent
past within 12-48 hours. The medical evidence (Exhibit ‘7’) fully
corroborates the evidence of PW-1 which has been found credible
by this Court.
26. This Court further finds that the undergarments of
the victim was seized vide seizure list (Exhibit ‘2’). It was sent to
the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Shivmitra
Chaudhary (PW-7) is the Hawaldar who brought the box
containing Exhibit ‘A’ and Exhibit ‘B’ (which were the samples).
Exhibit ‘A’ is the undergarment of the victim and a report of the
FSL which has been marked as Exhibit ’11’ shows that the blood
has been detected at places in the Exhibit marked ‘A’ and semen
has been detected in Exhibit marked ‘A’. Though semen of the
accused-appellant was also taken and marked Exhibit ‘B’ which
was sent to the FSL but the FSL report (Exhibit ’11’) states that
semen could not be detected in the Exhibit marked ‘B’. The
another report of the FSL (Exhibit ’11/1′) shows that Exhibit
marked ‘A’ containing blood and semen had species of human
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
19/22
origin. These are the additional materials on the record apart from
the evidence of the prosecutrix which prove the prosecution case.
27. This Court has found that the learned trial court has
duly appreciated the entire evidences available on the record. On
re-appreciation of the entire evidences, this Court finds no reason
to interfere with the impugned judgment.
28. On the point of sentence, learned counsel for the
appellant has submitted before us that the learned trial court has
awarded a sentence of twelve years rigorous imprisonment and a
fine of Rs. 30,000/- for the offences under Section 4 of the POCSO
Act. The submission is that while considering as to how sentences
are to be awarded to an accused of crime, the learned trial court
was required to take into consideration certain relevant factors. In
the present case, the learned trial court has observed that to send a
strong deterrent message to the perpetrators of the crime, the crime
of such nature requires an exemplary punishment.
29. At this stage, we take note of some judicial
pronouncements on the subject. In the case of Santa Singh Vs.
State of Punjab reported in 1976 AIR 2386, the Hon’ble Division
Bench of the Supreme Court observed as under:-
“Modern penology as pointed out by this court
regards crime and criminal as equally material when
the right sentence has to be picked out. It turns the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
20/22focus not only on the crime, but also on the criminal
and seeks to personalize the punishment so that the
reformist component is as much operative as the
deterrent element. It is necessary for this purpose that
facts of a social and personal nature, sometimes
altogether irrelevant, if not injurious, at the stage of
fixing the guilt, may have to be brought to the notice
of the Court when the actual sentence is determined.
The material may be placed before the Court by
means of affidavits, but if either party disputes the
correctness or veracity of the material sought to be
produced by the other, an opportunity would have to
be given to the party concerned to lead evidence for
the purpose of bringing such material on record. The
hearing on question of sentencing would be rendered
devoid of all meaning and content and it would
become an idle formality if it were merely confined to
oral submissions without any opportunity being given
to the parties and particularly to the accused, to
produce material in regard to the various factors
bearing on the question of sentence, and if necessary,
to lead evidence for the purpose of placing such
material before the Court… Of course, care would
have to be taken by the Court to see that this hearing
on question of sentence is not abused and turned into
an instrument for unduly protracting the
trial/proceeding. The claim of due and proper hearing
would have to be harmonized with the requirement of
expeditious disposal of the proceedings.”
30. In the case of Gurmukh Singh vs. State of
Haryana reported in (2009) 15 SCC 635, the Hon’ble Supreme
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
21/22
Court has laid down various factors which are required to be
considered while awarding punishment to a convict. One of the
factors which is required to be considered is the conduct and
behaviour of the accused after the incident.
31. From the catena of judgments of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court on the point of sentence, it would transpire that the
possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of a convict is an
important factor which has to be taken into account as a mitigating
circumstance before sentencing him. It has been held that it would
be a bounden duty cast on the courts to elicit information of all the
relevant factors and consider those regarding the possibility of
reformation, even if the accused remains silent.
32. From the judgment of the learned trial court, we find
that at the time of judgment, the appellant was aged about twenty
six years. There is no evidence that he cannot be reformed. Section
4 of the POCSO Act provides for a minimum sentence of ten years
to a convict. In the present case, we are of the opinion that the
sentence of twelve years awarded by the learned trial court is fit to
be reduced to a period of ten years under Section 4 of the POCSO
Act. Thus, we modify the sentence awarded to the appellant under
Section 4 of the POCSO Act to a rigorous imprisonment for ten
years. The amount of fine and the sentences awarded for the other
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.425 of 2021 dt.08-01-2025
22/22
charges shall remain intact. All the sentences shall run
concurrently.
33. In result, this appeal is partly allowed.
34. The trial court records together with a copy of the
judgment shall be sent to the learned trial court.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
nirajkrs/Sushma2-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 31-01-2025 Transmission Date 31-01-2025
[ad_1]
Source link