Judgment D.P.S.Choudhary, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7-10-1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No. 97/92/17/93 convicting the sole appellant Shankar Yadav under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for seven years. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that one Kapileshwari Devi lodged a fardbeyan on 30-10-1991 at 4.00 p.m. alleging that on 23-10-1991 at 2.00 p.m. informants daughter, namely, Ranju Kumari had gone for cutting the grass towards east of her house in the field. She returned after and hour and told the informant that appellant (accused) Shankar Yadav had forcibly threw her on ground and criminally assaulted her, for half an hour she remained unconscious. The informant noticed bleeding from her private part. She wanted to take her daughter to the police station and also hospital for lodging F.I.R. and her treatment, but in the meantime Dhanik Lal Yadav and others came to inform her that there was no necessity of going to the police station or of her treatment. She shall be treated at her house. The informant protested that she will go to the police station to institute the case. Thereafter, the aforesaid persons dragged her and assaulted with fists and slaps and confined in a room along with her husband. After some time, a Doctor was brought for treatment who gave stitches on her private part. The above-named persons also asked the informant that there will be panchayati in the village and hence the matter should be reported to the police. As such, she did not venture to go out of her house. Her husband was taken before the Sarpanch who got executed a bond for Rs. 2,000.00 on which the informants husband remonstrated and declined to execute the bond. Somehow or the other the informant and her husband escaped from the village and reported the matter to the police and on her fardbeyan the case was registered. After investigation the police submitted charge-sheet under various Sections 376, 201, 120-B, 452, 323 of I.P.C. and after cognizance the trial proceeded in the Court below. The appellant was charged under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. while the others including Dhanik Lal Yadav and Ram Yadav were charged under Secs. 452, 323, 342, 201/ 120-B of I.P.C. 3. After investigation the police submitted charge-sheet under various Sections 376, 201, 120-B, 452, 323 of I.P.C. and after cognizance the trial proceeded in the Court below. The appellant was charged under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. while the others including Dhanik Lal Yadav and Ram Yadav were charged under Secs. 452, 323, 342, 201/ 120-B of I.P.C. 3. The defence case is complete denial of the occurrence and false allegation because of village politics. 4. In the Court below, all the three accused were put on trial but others acquitted and only appellant was convicted under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. 5. The prosecution examined in all nine witnesses, including the Doctor and the Investigating Officer of the case. After considering the evidences of the informant, Doctor and other P.Ws. the trial Court convicted the appellant under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. 6. The learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant is in jail custody since 17- 1-1992 till today. He was not allowed bail either by the lower Court or by the High Court. As such, he has remained in jail custody for more than seven years 10 months. Thus he has already served the period of sentence of seven years awarded to him under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. He did not press the appeal on merit. Heard the A.P.P. 7. Perused the lower Court record and I find that the appellant has been in jail custody for more then seven years 10 months. 8. In the result, the Jail Superintendent, Darbhanga is directed to release the appellant (Shankar Yadav) forthwith if not released as yet or not wanted in any other case. With this direction, the appeal is dismissed.