Judgment Loknath Prasad, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 16th November, 1992 passed in Sessions Trial No. 275/91 thereby and thereunder the sole appellant Shushil Sanga was found guilty under Sec. 376, IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and he was further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00 , in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant Charki Mundain alongwith her husband Pushu Munda and their neice Anju Tamba on 9.10.89 to Ranchi in connection with Durgapuja festival and when they were moving in the town in the night at about 6 p. m. or so, then near Sandhya Cinema one person whose name was subsequently disclosed as Basant dragged her husband towards a lane. It has been alleged that the informant and her neice protested but he did not listen and gave a threatening that if she wanted to seva the life or her husband, they must follow. In the meantime, other accused persons also came and the informant and her neice alongwith her husband were forcibly taken to a newly constructed house situate in P.N. Bose compound. It has also been alleged that Basant then forcibly took the informant inside the room in a cot and committed raps and when the informant wanted to raise alarm she was threatened and in course of rape Rs. 100.00 which had fallen from the body of the informant was taken away by Basant. Subsequently another man Afsar took the neice Anju Tamba away and she was also forcibly raped in the same place. In the meantime another person that is the appellant came by a scooter and he took the informant inside and committed rape but at that very time a police officer came and apprehended them and Afsar was also apprehended but Basant could escape away. The fardbayan of the informant was also recorded. Then this case was instituted as against the appellant Afsar and Basant Das. 3. During investigation, the informant and her neice Anju were medically examined by a lady doctor and the charge-sheet was submitted as against this appellant, Basant and Afsar. The fardbayan of the informant was also recorded. Then this case was instituted as against the appellant Afsar and Basant Das. 3. During investigation, the informant and her neice Anju were medically examined by a lady doctor and the charge-sheet was submitted as against this appellant, Basant and Afsar. This appellant and others during the course of trial had not set up any defence version and it was only their defence that they had been falsely implicated in this case. During trial, Md. Afsar who was on bail absconded at the time of argument and so his trial was separated and the accused Basant Das was not found guilty by the trial court and so he has been acquitted; whereas this appellant was found guilty under Sec. 376, IPC and he was convicted and sentenced in the manner indicated above. 4. This occurrence took place in the night of 9.10.89 between 9 to 10 p.m. during Durgapuja festival when the informant Charki Mundain alongwith her husband Pushu Munda their neice Anju came to Ranchi town in connection with Dussehra festival and while they were moving in the town they were apprehended and were taken to a house under construction and then the heinous offence of rape was committed. Naturally the informant who has figured as P.W. 1 and her husband P.W. 2 Pushu and their neice P.W. 3 are the most important witness. P.W. 1 has claimed that on Dussehra festival she alongwith her husband P.W.2 and neice P.W. 3 came to Ranchi town, then at about 9 p.m. or so when they came near Sandhya cinema, the accused names could be known that is Afsar and Basant, in course of their chase, apprehended the husband of the informant and forcibly took him towards a lane and also gave threatening that unless they will follow them, the life of the husband will be in danger and they were taken to a house which was under construction where a darwan was there and he was forced to leave the place and Basant on the point of pistol first of all forced her to go in a room where rape was committed and after that Afsar took her neice Anju and Afsar also committed rape on her (Anju). Subsequently this very appellant came on a scooter and he aiso forcibly took the informant in that very room and committed rape on her. Subsequently this very appellant came on a scooter and he aiso forcibly took the informant in that very room and committed rape on her. In the meantime, a police officer came and apprehended him alongwith the informant and so this case was instituted. Admittedly this witness is a tribal lady of the village and she got no enmity with the appellant. In such a situation, false implication can be ruled out. 5. Moreover, the evidence of this witness fully finds corroboration from her husband Pushu Munda, P.W. 2 and their neice P.W. 3 because they were also forcibly taken to the newly constructed house and in presence of the husband, the informant was taken inside the house and this appellant committed rape. P.W. 3 is also a victim girl and she too was subjected to rape by the absconding accused Afsar. 6. The evidence of this witness also finds support from the evidence of P.W. 4 Sita Ram Yadav who was the night-guard alongwith Ramanand Singh and according to this witness on the relevant night, three boys came with two girls and threatened him and asked him to leave the place. In the meantime, police came and apprehended them and the police also seized bed sheets and petty coat and under-garments of the girls in his presence. The prosecution case also finds support from the evidence of P.W. 6 Kamesh Chandra Sinha, the S.I. of police attached to Ranchi Control Room and at the relevant time he was O.C. Lalpur P.S. and when he was in round duty he learnt that some persons took two girls in a house at P.N. Bose compound and so he rushed to that place and found the informant alongwith this very appellant in a room and so they were apprehended and other accused persons also were apprehended and fardbayan of the informant was also recorded. From the evidence of this witness, it can be said that the appellant was apprehended with the informant just after he committed rape and when he was changing his cloth. 7. Prosecution case also finds support from the evidence of P.W. 5, Dr. Subla Lakra who examined the informant on 10.10.89 that is, on the next day. From the evidence of this witness, it can be said that the appellant was apprehended with the informant just after he committed rape and when he was changing his cloth. 7. Prosecution case also finds support from the evidence of P.W. 5, Dr. Subla Lakra who examined the informant on 10.10.89 that is, on the next day. As the victim lady is a married girl so no sign of rape could be detected, but so far Anju is concerned, the doctor found injury on her private part which clearly supports the prosecution case the informant and Anju were subjected to rape in the night of 9.10.89. 8. So from the discussions made above, it can be said that there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the appellant alongwith others forcibly committed rape as against the informant. Accordingly the trial court was perfectly justified in convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 376, IPC. The trial court sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and has also awarded a find of Rs. 1000.00 . So far as the sentence is concerned, it can be said that the main accused according to the FIR is Afsar and Basantand they apprehended the victim lady and subsequently this appellant carne there and also committed rape. In that view of the matter, sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment is hereby reduced and modified to that of seven years rigorous imprisonment under Sec. 376, IPC and the sentence of Rs. 1000.00 ( one thousand) as fine as imposed by the trial court is hereby confirmed and maintained and if this fine amount is not paid by the appellant in default and if this fine amount is not paid by the appellant in default of that he will undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. If fine amount is realized the entire amount is to be paid by the trial court to the victim lady, that is the informant. With this modification in sentence, this appeal is dismissed. The last sound of appellant is also cancelled.