Per Virender Singh, C.J.

The appeal on hand has been preferred by accused appellant (i) Gujua Manjhi @ Gajju Hansada, (ii) Guddu Manjhi @ Guddu Hansada and (iii) Anand Manjhi Hansada @ Anand Manjhi @ Hansda against the judgment of conviction dated 16.5.2013 and order of sentence dated 18.5.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, F.T.C. Bokaro in S.T. No. 450 of 2010, whereby and where-under all the three appellants have been found guilty under Section 366/34 and 376 (2)(g) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each and in default to pay fine, R.I for six months for the offence under Section 366/34 IPC. They have been further sentenced to undergo R.I for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-each and in default to pay fine, R.I for six months for the offence under Section 376(2)(g). Both the substantive sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

2. The case of prosecution sans unnecessary details, as one finds from the written report of victim-P.W.7, is that on 29.06.2010 at 8 P.M. in the night, while she was alone in her house and was sleeping having taken her meal, Gujua Manjhi (aged about 23 years), Guddu Manjhi (a