IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J., NAVNEET KUMAR, J.
Janak Mahto Son Of Late Ramdhan Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
I.A.(Cr.) No. 1580 of 2025
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for keeping the sentence in abeyance in connection with the order of sentence dated 08.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, Gumla in Sessions Trial spt Case No. 51 of 2002 arising out of Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 89 of 1991, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted under Section 364 /34, 302/34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC) and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years with a fine of Rs. 2,000 for committing the offence under Section 364 /34 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine further undergo RI for one month. He has further been sentenced to undergo RI for life with a fine of Rs. 25,000 for committing offence under Section 302 /34 IPC and in default of payment of fine further undergo RI for two years each only.
2. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been implicated with the aid of Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE even though there is no specific overt act said to be committed by the appellant.
3. It has been submitted that the reaso
The court held that corroborated eyewitness testimony substantiates conviction, while an unsupported alibi plea is insufficient for appeal suspension.
The victim's admission of consent complicates the prosecution's case under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC, warranting suspension of the appellant's sentence during appeal.
The court upheld the conviction for sexual offenses based on credible victim testimony and corroborative medical evidence, stating that delay in identification does not negate the validity of the pro....
Evidence of a prolonged relationship can influence the decision for suspending a sentence under IPC provisions, particularly where the victim's testimony supports the defense.
The victim's failure to report alleged rapes while living with a co-accused undermines her credibility, warranting suspension of the appellant's sentence pending appeal.
The court upheld the conviction for gang rape based on credible victim testimony, ruling that contradictions and co-accused acquittals do not automatically justify sentence suspension.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the appeal process is delayed significantly and key witness credibility is in question.
Conviction under Section 34 of the IPC requires evidence of an overt act; mere presence at the crime scene is insufficient.
A conviction cannot stand based solely on circumstantial evidence without direct eyewitness testimony, emphasizing the necessity for substantive proof.
Inconsistencies in witness testimony can create reasonable doubt, leading to suspension of sentence pending appeal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.