Consistency and corroboration of evidence are crucial in affirming a judgment of conviction. The court may consider modifying the sentence based on the prolonged prosecution and time spent in custody.

Heard Ms. Madhulika Dasgupta. learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This application is directed against the judgment dated 02.09.2005 passed by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2001/141 of 2005 by which the judgment dated 16.02.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Jamtara in Kundahit P.S. Case No. 69 of 1998 corresponding to G.R. No. 409 of 1990 convicting the petitioner for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC and sentencing him to various terms has been affirmed.

3. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no corroboration in the evidence of the witnesses adduced on behalf of the prosecution. It has been stated that the wife of the petitioner had earlier instituted a case against the accused persons which was prior to the case instituted by the informant of the present case. Learned counsel submits that merely as a retaliation to the case earlier instituted by the wife of the petitioner. G.R. No. 409 of 1998 was instituted. It has also been stated that the witnesses who have been examined on behalf of the prosecution are highly interested witnesses as PW 1 and PW 4 is sister and father of the informant respectively and PW 6 is the informant himself. Learned counsel also put forward an alternative argument that if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction, the order of sentence may suitably be modified considering the fact that the petitioner is facing the rigors of prosecution since the year 1998 and had remained for 2 months in custody.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer.

5. It appears from the allegation made in the FIR that the petitioner misrepresenting himself as Agent of Bihar Rajya Khadi Udyog, Patna along with one Chaturvedi Singh who was represented as a Supervisor of the Board had brought some form of Bihar Rajya Khadi Udyog since 1997 and has cheated him of Rs.18,000/-. It has also been alleged that a false promise of providing some articles such as, 20 H.P. Machine, four Hauler machine, solar and Sulabh Sachuhalaya and a job to the sister of the informant at Angan Bari Kendra was made by the petitioner, but none of the said articles or any job was provided which ultimately led the informant to institute an FIR which was registered as G.R. No. 409 of 1998. Investigation resulted in submission of charge-sheet and after framing of charge, cognizance was taken and trial proceeded.

6. In course of trial, 7 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. PW 1-Shanti Chakrabarti has stated that in December 1977, the petitioner and one Chaturvedi Singh had come to his residence representing themselves as agent of Bihar Rajya Khadi Gram Udyog. He has also stated that they have installed Gobar Gas Plant in his house and Rs. 600/- was paid to them. He has further stated that on the pretext of providing job to the sister of the informant and of providing certain articles, signatures were taken and an amount of Rs. 18,000/- was taken, but nothing was provided. PW 2-Narayan Chandra Ram has stated about the installation of Gobar Gas Plant in the house of the informant. He has stated that he was also approached by the petitioner and Chaturvedi Singh which he refused. PW 3-Santosh Chakrabarthy has deposed that there was a meeting of Peace Committee in Amba, village wherein Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police had participated. He has further stated that in the meeting, the informant (PW 6) had given a petition mentioning about the act of the petitioner in duping the informant of Rs. 18,000/-. This witness has stated that he had heard about the petitioner and Chaturvedi Singh taking an amount of Rs. 18,000/- on the pretext of providing job as well as some articles. PW 4-Sukumar Chakrabarthy has deposed that the petitioner has come to village Amba and had installed Gobar Gas Plant in s