Ashutosh Kumar, J.—Both the appeals have been taken up together and are being disposed off by this common judgment.

2. We have heard Mr. Chandra Mohan Singh, the learned counsel for the appellant/Ravindra Singh in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 653 of 2023 and Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, the learned counsel for the appellant/Ruksad @ Rukshad in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 816 of 2023.

3. The State, in both the appeals, has been represented by Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the learned APP.

4. Both the appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short the POCSO Act, 2012) vide judgment dated 19.04.2023 passed by the learned 7th Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO), Sasaram in POCSO Case No. 42 of 2019, arising out of Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 217 of 2019. By order dated 28.04.2023, they have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years, to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer S.I. for six months for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

5. A five year old girl is alleged to have been raped and strangulated to death. The dead-body was recovered by her father/Santosh Rajwar (P.W. 4) with the help of others. The appellants were suspected to have committed the crime.

6. Appellant/Ravindra Singh is said to have offered a biscuit to the victim before the occurrence. Appellant/Ruksad @ Ruksahd is said to be a friend of Ravindra, who had come from Delhi to visit him. Both of them had been residing in the house of a co-villager for some time. Both the appellants were, therefore, arrested.

7. It appears from the records that the investigation was concluded only on the basis of suspicion against the afore-noted two appellants. Though some efforts were made to have the appellants medically examined, but there is no report on record which only leads to one inference that nothing concrete could be procured with respect to the offence of rape and murder of the deceased.

8. A horrendous tale by the father of the deceased (P.W. 4), forms the basis of the prosecution case.

9. P.W. 4 (the father) had lodged the fardbeyan on 30.04.2019 at Karuna Hospital in Bikramganj at about 10:40 hours, alleging that his wife/Asha Devi (P.W. 3) had informed him at his workplace, a Rice Mill Plant, that his five year old daughter is missing from the home. On such information, he came back home at about 08:30 P.M. on 30.04.2019 and was told by his wife that Ravindra, who is the son of the cobrother of his neighbour, namely, Surendra Mahto, and his friend, who had come from Delhi, had been playing with the victim/deceased some times ago. On this information, P.W. 4 along with the other villagers went to the house of Ravindra Singh and accosted him and his friend, who did not give any specific reply. In fact, they, may be for pretence, offered to search his daughter. Shortly, thereafter, the dead-body of his daughter was found in the field. From the look of the dead-body, it appeared that she was strangulated as there was a ligature mark and the deceased was bleeding from her private parts. This gave an impression that, perhaps, the appellants had raped and killed the deceased.

10. Based on the afore-noted fardbeyan statement of P.W. 4, a case vide Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 217 of 2019, dated 30.04.2019, was registered for investigation under Sections 376 and 302/34 of the IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections 3 (2) (V) and 3 (1) (W) (I) (II) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

11. The police, toeing the same line of suspicion, charge-sheeted the appellants, whereupon the case was committed to the Special Court for trial.

12. The Trial Court/Special Court, after having examined eleven witnesses on behalf of the prosecution and one on behalf of the defense, convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesa