Judgment B.N.Singh "Neelam", J. 1. This government criminal appeal is so preferred by the State under the provisions of Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal so passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, III, Patna, dated 31st of March, 1984, while disposing of sessions trial Nos. 491/81 and 560/81 by the common judgment under challenge. 2. Altogether sixteen accused persons faced the trial but during the pendency of the hearing of this appeal because of accused-respondents Ram Pravesh Paswan and Jethu Manjhi dying, the present criminal has abated as against them. That being the position, there remains now fourteen accused respondents named above. 3. It transpires that relating to the dacoity so taking paice at mid-night in between 7th/8th of March, 1981 at Village Shahpur, P.S. Bakhtiyarpur, district Patna in the house of Ramdeo Singh (Mahton) figuring as P.W.12 in commission of which the murder of Baso Singh and one Jethu Paswan was so committed, the accused persons whose case records were so committed to the court of sessions for trial after completion of the investigation, submission of charge-sheet and after taking cognizance of the offence their case records so being committed, they all stood charged under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. Furthermore, the accused-respondents Baleshwar Paswan, Jagdish Paswan, Nagina Manjhi and Chhotu Manjhi also stood charged u/s 412 of the I.P.C. for their retaining some of the articles of the inmates of the house being carried over or transferred to them in commission of the said dacoity so taking place in the house of Ramdeo Singh (P.W.10). 4. The accused-respondents had abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried and in course of trial on behalf of the prosecution it transpires that as many as nineteen prosecution witnesses so got examined. Four D.Ws are also examined on behalf of the defence. Furthermore, test identification parade of some of the accused persons as suspects was so conducted at two occasions, i.e., on 3.4.1981 and 10.6.1981. The witnesses also identified some of the suspects in the T.I.Parade on the basis of which the T.I.P. charts were so prepared duly proved and marked as exhibits 2 & 5. Furthermore, test identification parade of some of the accused persons as suspects was so conducted at two occasions, i.e., on 3.4.1981 and 10.6.1981. The witnesses also identified some of the suspects in the T.I.Parade on the basis of which the T.I.P. charts were so prepared duly proved and marked as exhibits 2 & 5. The T.I.Parade of articles was so also held on 27.6.1981 and relating to such seizure and T.I. Parade held certain documents are proved and marked as exhibits being duly proved by the Circle Officer (P.W.18) conducting T I.Parade of articles. 5. This will not be out of place to mention at the very outset that in the Fardbeyan so given by the first informant Nunu Prasad (P.W.12) even two of the accused-respondents, namely, Shri Mahton and Suresh Mahton are named in the first information report claimed to have been identified by the inmates of the family. Ramdeo Mahton in whose house the dacoity, as per the prosecution case, was so committed happens to be the grand-father of the first informant and Baso Singh (Mahton) who was done to death in course of commission of dacoity happened to be the father of the first informant. As against F.I.R. named accused-respondents Shri Mahton there are three identifications against him so made by P.Ws. 10, 11 & 12 whereas as against another F.I.R. named accused Suresh Mahton, there are four identifications against him as made by P.Ws. 10 to 13. With regard to the identification of the other accused-respondents, the same shall be detailed in course of discussion of the evidence of the material prosecution witnesses. 6. The defence version, in short, is that the accused respondents did not participate in the dacoity when murder was so committed though it was admitted even on behalf of the defence in course of trial that dacoity in the house of Ramdeo Mahton was so committed on the said night; in commission of which even two of the persons, namely, Baso Singh and Jethu Paswan were shot dead. 7. The accused-respondents had challenged with regard to their participation in the commission of the offences for which they stood charged and it is on just mere suspicion that some of the accused persons belonging to village Kaila, PS. Chandi, district Nalanda also got falsely implicated. 8. In support of the defence case so put, even four of the D.Ws. 7. The accused-respondents had challenged with regard to their participation in the commission of the offences for which they stood charged and it is on just mere suspicion that some of the accused persons belonging to village Kaila, PS. Chandi, district Nalanda also got falsely implicated. 8. In support of the defence case so put, even four of the D.Ws. have been examined in course of trial. The learned court below, it transpires, after evaluating the evidence available on the record has come to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused- respondents upto the hilt and taking that view, by the impugned judgment they are acquitted. It is against this judgement of acquittal that the State opted to prefer this government criminal appeal challenging the impugned judgment on the grounds mentioned in this memo of appeal. 9. Before detailing the grounds so taken by the State represented by the learned A.P.P. as to interfere with the judgment of acquittal being also controverted by the other side learned counsel representing the accused respondents, for the better appreciaton of the matter in issue the prosecution case, in nutshell, is necessary to be detailed. 10. The first informant of this case is Nunu Prasad son of the deceased Baso Singh and relating to the occurrence taking place in between the night of 7th/8th of March, 1981 the matter is reported on 8.3.1981 at 6 A.M. to Nawal Kishore Mishra, the investigating officer figuring as P.W.19. According to him, the dacoits numbering about 20 to 25 persons entered into their house in between the night of 7th/8th of March, 1981 at mid night by scaling over the walls and started breaking the doors after entering into the house. First of all the doors of the room occupied by Maha Sundari Devi (P.W.11), who happens to be the mother of the first informant and wife of the deceased Baso Singh, was attempted to be broken. When finding no way out it was so made open by the inmates, the further case of the prosecution is that Maha Sundari Devi also being dragged by stretching her locks of the hair and then the ornament on her person was snatched awaythis act being done by the F.I.R. two named accused-respondents, i.e., Shri Mahton and Suresh Mahton as detailed in the evidence of P.W.11. The informant P.W.12 claimed to be sleeping with his brother Baso Singh (since deceased) at that time on the verandah when he got up after the dacoits entered into the courtyard and even approached on the verandah when alarm was so raised by him but he was directed to keep quiet. The first informant claimed to identify the F.I.R. named two accused-respondents and the means of identification to him was the torch lights flashed by the members of the dacoits in course of commission of dacoity. The details of the garments so found on the person of the dacoits find place in the Fardbeyan also with regard to the age and gait of the dacoits. Their houses. are claimed to have been ransacked and articles looted which included even silver ornaments and, as per the very case of the prosecution, when in the said house on that night the informants uncle, namely, Amrik Singh (P.W.13) was sleeping with his wife Kunti Devi, who happens to be the aunt of the informant figuring in course of trial as P.W.2, she was fired at as a result of which she also sustained injuries. It is the definite case of the prosecution that in course of looting away the articles, Baso Singh was shot at who breathed his last in course of his being carried to the hospital and Kunti Devi (P.W.2) was also injured. While retreating it is also the case of the prosecution that the dacoits shot Jethu Paswan (dead) whose dead body was so found outside the house soon after the retreat of the dacoits. The Fardbeyan, as detailed above, relating to the said occurrence taking place was recorded on 8.3.1981 at 6 A.M. at the door of the first informant at village Shahpur by the I.O. (P.W.19). 11. The learned A.P.P. representing the State has submitted that though the learned court below has acquitted the accused-respondents but on account of the intrinsic value of the evidence on record and its adequacy on material facts with regard to the complicity of the accused respondents committing offences coming under the purview of Ss. 11. The learned A.P.P. representing the State has submitted that though the learned court below has acquitted the accused-respondents but on account of the intrinsic value of the evidence on record and its adequacy on material facts with regard to the complicity of the accused respondents committing offences coming under the purview of Ss. 396 & 412 of I.P.C., they would have rather been convicted instead of being acquitted and the learned session judge has, thus, overlooked those materials available on the record as a result of which he has drawn a wrong conclusion on assumptions not even detailing the reasons which led him as to acquit the accused-respondents and, that being the position, the judgment of acquittal so passed by the learned court below under challenge can well be said to be perverse; liable to be set-aside. The dacoity, it is pointed out, was so committed conjointly in course of which two murders where also committed and taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence so committed, it was the bounden duty of the learned court below as to go deep into the matter discussing the evidence available analytically instead passing a cryptic judgment the maintenance of which could amount to grave miscarriage of justice. It is because of the compelling circumstances that the State, thus, decided to prefer this government criminal appeal challenging the impugned judgment of acquittal. Elaborating his argument, it has further been submitted, that the learned court below has utterly failed to consider the important aspect of the case and the judgment under challenge rather is based on surmises and conjectures. On no account it can be said, as submitted, in the background of the material available on the record that the Fardbeyan was not so recorded at 6 A.M. on the 8th of March, 1981 and there is no question of the police being, in any way, in collusion with the members of the prosecution side. On no account it can be said, as submitted, in the background of the material available on the record that the Fardbeyan was not so recorded at 6 A.M. on the 8th of March, 1981 and there is no question of the police being, in any way, in collusion with the members of the prosecution side. P.W. 3, who is the attesting witness to Fardbeyan, also supports the recording of the same at 6 A.M. on 8.3.1981 ano this factum is also not being challenged by the defence side and, that being the position, there is no question of having any chance for falsely implicating the accused persons, particularly, accused- respondents No. 1 & 2 whose names find place in the Fardbeyan itself because of the inmates in course of dacoity identifying them and accusedrespondents 1 & 2 admittedly, being known to the inmates from before. In the background of the evidence of P.Ws. 2, 12 & 19 it is, thus, pointed out that on no account it can be said that the Fardbeyan was belatedly recorded and after recording the same it being sent to Bakhtiyarpur police station; police case was so registered on the same day at 9 A.M. and this aspect as, particularly, coming from the mouth of PW. 9 would have been relied upon. As regards the means of identification it is submitted that it has come from the mouth of material prosecution witnesses that because of the torch light flashed by the dacoits in course of commission of dacoity, that threw sufficient light as to identify two of the miscreants by name, i.e., respondent Nos. 1 & 2, namely, Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton being known to the inmates even from before and the inmates claimed to identify even other miscreants if they being placed before them. In this background, it is also pointed out that the learned court below has erred in holding that torch light so flashed in such circumstance cannot be said to be sufficient as to identify the miscreants and that way the prosecution story is disbelieved and this finding so arrived at by the learned court below can well be said to be erroneous and perverse. In support of his this contention the learned APP has banked upon a reported case 1981 Suppl. S.C.C. 24 (Shakti Patra & ors V/s. State of West Bengal). In support of his this contention the learned APP has banked upon a reported case 1981 Suppl. S.C.C. 24 (Shakti Patra & ors V/s. State of West Bengal). In the instant case also there is direct testimony showing that the torch light was so flashed by the dacoitsthrowing sufficient light and mere non-mentioning of the torch light in the F.I.R., which is also not the case in the instant case, can on no account be fatal to the prosecution case because of accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in the present case being known to the inmates from before, their gait and voice also helped the inmates to identify accusedrespondent Nos. 1 & 2 while committing dacoity with murder and that is why the names of the respondents Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton find place in the Fardbeyan so given without delay and this aspect would have been taken into consideration by the learned court below and should not have been so lightly overlooked which led the learned court below as to arrive at a wrong conclusion acquitting even the two named accused-respondents. Since some of the other accused-respondents also got identified in course of the T.I. Parade so held at two occasions and because of the articles so recovered from the accused-respondents who faced separately charged u/s, 412 IPC, it was incumbent on the part of the learned court below as to convict all the accused-respondents u/s. 396 of the I.P.C. and to those being charged u/s. 412 IPC, over and above also u/s 412 IPC. In support of his contention with regard to the identification of the respondents established, the learned APP has referred to two of the reported cases and they are A.I.R. 1956 Patna 39 (Nevy Dusadh V/s. State) and 1996 (1) PLJR 91 (Oaroga Yadav & ors. V/s. State of Bihar). In the background of the reported case so cited it is pointed out that nonmentioning and non-production of torch light would not disprove the case of the prosecution when the witnesses are consistent and direct testimony shows that torch light was available at the scene of occurrence being flashed which was the means of identification. V/s. State of Bihar). In the background of the reported case so cited it is pointed out that nonmentioning and non-production of torch light would not disprove the case of the prosecution when the witnesses are consistent and direct testimony shows that torch light was available at the scene of occurrence being flashed which was the means of identification. On these grounds and other ground so taken as good grounds for interfering with the judgment of acquittal, on behalf of the State, the prayer is that the judgment of acquittal under challenge in the instant case be rather set-aside and the accused-respondents be convicted for committing the offences under which they stood charged. 12. On behalf of the respondents it is pointed out that there is nothing wrong in the impugned judgment of acquittal and the court below was perfectly justified in holding that in course of trial the prosecution had failed to establish with regard to there being sufficient light giving opportunity to the inmates as to identify two of the accused-respondents by name whose names also figured in the Fardbeyan and to keep in memory the faces of others. some of them claimed to have been identified in course of T.I.Parades so held. By referring to the evidence of P.W. 18 Sri Dashrath Munda, Executive Magistrate, holding T.I. Parade of the articles, it is pointed out, that the same was so conducted without observing the formalities of law and, thus, the learned court below was also perfectly justified in acquitting the accused-respondents of their, in any way, not committing the offence coming under the purview of Section 412 IPC. The second T.I. Parade so held on 10.6.1981 (Ext. The second T.I. Parade so held on 10.6.1981 (Ext. 5) in which thirteen accused persons are said to have been identified, that can well be said to be belated one because of the occurrence taking place on 7th/8th of night, March 1981 and, furthermore, the witnesses claiming to identify the accused-respondents in column 7 of the T.I.P. Charts have also not detailed as to under what circumstance and at what occasion the witnesses had an opportunity to see the faces of the accused persons which was so kept in their memory and which facilitated them to identify them in course of T.I. Parade so held and it is in this light that the learned court below, as submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, was perfectly justified in not relying upon Exts. 2 & 5 which are the T.I.P. charts. The accused-respondents, it is pointed out, have been falsely implicated and that they had, in no way, participated in the commission of dacoity with murder though, admittedly, dacoity with murder was committed out since the prosecution had failed to establish the accusedrespondents participating and false identification was so made due to enmity with some of the accused-respondents coming on, the judgment of acquittal in such circumstance, in no way, thus, requires interference and since there is no merit in this government criminal appeal so preferred, the same rather be dismissed. 13. After hearing both the side lawyers, we have carefully gone through the evidence available on the record oral and documentary. Needless to say, with regard to commission of dacoity in course of which two persons succumbed to the injuries because of the dacoits firing at, this part of story is admitted not even challenged by the other side. Now out of the sixteen accused- respondents faced the trial and government criminal appeal started against two of them because of their dying, as regards the present fourteen accused- respondents as per the material so collected in course of trial, there are three identifications against Sri Mahton, the named accused-respondent said to have been done by P.Ws. 10, 11 & 12, i.e., Ramdeo Mahton, father of the deceased Baso Mahton and the grandfather of the first informant Nunu Prasad with that of Maha Sundari Devi (P.W.11) mother of the informant and Nunu Prasad, the first informant himself. 10, 11 & 12, i.e., Ramdeo Mahton, father of the deceased Baso Mahton and the grandfather of the first informant Nunu Prasad with that of Maha Sundari Devi (P.W.11) mother of the informant and Nunu Prasad, the first informant himself. As against accused-respondent No. 2, Suresh Mahton, who is also named in the Fardbeyan as accused, there are four identification against him, Ramdeo Mahton, Maha Sundari Devi, Nunu Prasad, i.e., P.Ws. 10, 11 & 12 have also identified Suresh Mahton, over and above. Amrik Singh, P.W. 13, who is informants uncle also claims to identify Suresh Mahton. That being the position, there are four identification against him, when put on T.I. Parade, as far as Karu Mahton is concerned, he is said to have been identified by P.Ws. 6, 12 & 13, Moti Kahar by P.Ws. 6 & 13, Chhotu Manjhi by P.Ws. 6, 12 & 13, Nagina Manjhi by the same set of P.Ws, Baleshwar Paswan son of Pannu Paswan by P.W. 6, Krishna Paswan son of Pitambar by P.W. 13, Krishna Manjhi by P.Ws. 6, 12 & 13, Sheo Lal Paswan by P.Ws, 6 & 13 and MulShanker Prasad by P.W.6. As regards the T.l. Parade of the articles so hold, i.e., so held on 27.6.1981 conducted by P.W.18, the Circle Officer, the Judicial Magistrates conducting T.I. Parade of the suspects are also examined and they figured as P.Ws. 14 & 17. This will also not be out of place to mention that three of the medical officers are also examined in course of trial and they figured as P.Ws. 15, 16 & 21 and the injury reports with that of the postmortem reports so prepared by them are marked as Exts. 3, 3/1 4 & 3. Admittedly, the injury so sustained by P.W. 12, one of the inmates of the house, and the postmortem report so prepared find full support with the prosecution story. 14. In the background of these materials so available, we have analytically taken into consideration the situation under which the said offence was so committed and also in that background the impugned judgment of acquittal under challenge is also looked into. In our considered opinion as far as respondent Nos. 14. In the background of these materials so available, we have analytically taken into consideration the situation under which the said offence was so committed and also in that background the impugned judgment of acquittal under challenge is also looked into. In our considered opinion as far as respondent Nos. 1 & 2, namely, Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton are concerned, they stand on a different footing because at the time of lodging of the Fardbeyan these two persons are named in the F.I.R. Furthermore, against Sri Mahton there are three identifications so made by the inmates and against Suresh Mahton there are four identifications so made by the inmates figuring as P.Ws. 10 to 13. This is also the admitted case that these two accused-respondents were known to the members of the prosecution side from before and accused-respondent No. 1 being the co-villager and the accusedrespondent No. 2 being the man of the adjoining village. There is also consistencies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses identifying these two accusedrespondents and they have well-stood the test of the cross-examination. In our considered opinion, the means of identification as shown being the torch lights flashed by the dacoits can be said to be sufficient as to identify a person ting dacoity with murder that too the person/persons known to the inmates from before and persons/inmates identifying as a result of which their names find place right from the beginning when the Fardbeyan was so lodged, seems very much plausible when it has, particularly, come from the mouth of the inmates identifying these two accused-respondents of having chance to see them from a very close distance. Maha Sundari Devi, the mother of the informant, was also in a way assaulted by these two persons, her ornaments snatched away from her person and the first informant on the verandah of the house being close to the room occupied by Maha Sundari can on no account be said to be a chance witness on the point of identification of these two accused-respondents, namely Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton. The reported case so cited on behalf of the prosecution that torch light flashed in such circumstance can well be said to be throwing sufficient light to identify a person, particularly, known from before would have rather been banked upon and relied by the learned court below at the time of his arriving at a finding, particularly, in connection with accused Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton and rather, in such circumstance, the acquittal of these two accused-respondents can well be said to be perverse and the reasons assigned for their acquittal seem to be unreasonable and unsustainable. 15. As regards the other accused- respondents, their names do not find place in the Fardbeyan so lodged. When put on T.I. parade they have been identified by the witnesses and, as regards the identification, T.I. parade so held on 10.6.1981, that can well be said to be belated and the ground so taken and when these accused-respondents being produced in the court the witnesses might commithave an opportunity to see them in the dock which, thus, as submitted, on behalf of the defence, weakened the identification of them so made in the T.I. parade. Furthermore, admittedly, in column 7 of the T.I.P. charts it is has not been specifically mentioned as to under what circumstance and under which situation the witnesses had opportunity to see the faces of the accused- respondents except accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 keeping the same in memory facilitating them to identify when put as suspects along with others. As already detailed, as against the rest of the accused-respondents except accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, there is single identification against some of them, double against others and there are also three identifications against some of them but against all the accused-respondents being identified in course of T.I. parade so held, P.W. 6 is one of the witnesses identifying them. By looking into the evidence of P.W. 6 it transpires that he had an occasion to identify the dacoits while retreating. By looking into the evidence of P.W. 6 it transpires that he had an occasion to identify the dacoits while retreating. By taking into consideration the evidence of P.W. 6 Anand Mahton that does not seem to be trustworthy because the prosecution has failed to establish with regard to P.W. 6 also having sufficient means of identification as to store in memory the faces of the persons retreating and, that being the position, his identification as one of the witnesses carries no meaning; then remains identification of the rest of the accused-respondents except accusedrespondent Nos. 1 & 2 being single identification or of double identifications. Since the second T.I. parade is held belatedly and in column 7 of the T.I.P. charts the actual situation under which circumstance they had an opportunity to see their faces is not depicted clearly, in our considered opinion, the learned court below was in a way justified in not much relying upon exhibits 2 & 5 the T.I.P. charts, and the view so taken by the learned court below was also plausible with regard to giving no weightage to the identification so made in the T.I. parades. As regards the identification of the articles, the articles said to have been recovered are of common use and by looking into the evidence of P.W. 18 the Executive Magistrate holding T.I. parade of articles also indicates that the same has been done haphazardly without observing due process of law and, in that background the view so taken by the learned court below also plausible, the finding so arrived at by it not convicting some of the accused-respondents u/s. 412 IPC also does not require any interference. However, as also detailed above, as regards the inference so drawn up by the learned court below acquitting accused respondents 1 & 2, i.e., Sri Mahton and Suresh mahton of Shahpur and Rukunpura the findings so arrived at can well be said to be unreasonbable, perverse and unsustainable for the reason that against Sri Mahton there are three identifications and against Suresh Mahton there are four identifications made by the inmates at the time of commission of dacoity. Furthermore, they are very much named in the F.I.R. and the persons identifying are no one else but the inmates of the family, who had an occasion to see them at the time of the commission of the offence and they were, admittedly, known to the members of the prosecution side from before, By going through the impugned judgment under challenge, surprisingly enough, the learned court below has also not detailed as to what led to disbelieve the prosecution story acquitting accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 when there were three and four identifications against accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 respectively ? The matter with regard to the dacoits conjointly committing dacoity in course of which two persons were even shot dead is very much admitted by even the defence side and the said death was caused because of the cumulative effect of the violence used by the gang. As regards the involvement of accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, no other view also can be taken, in any way, acquitting the accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, rather in course of trial the prosecution had succeeded to establish the guilt of the accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, i.e., Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton, thus, committing the offence coming under the purview of Section 396 IPC. The intrinsic merits of the evidence as against the accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 seems to have been completely overlooked by the learned court below and on the basis of the reliable and unimpeachable evidence so available we are of the considered opinion that as regards the acquittal of accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, the same requires interference as to meet the ends of justice because the continuance of the same would rather carry grave miscarriage of justice. 16. Taking that view, as regards the acquittal of the accused-respondents except accused-respondents Nos. 1 & 2, i.e., Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton, since the view so taken by the learned court below also being plausible not relying upon the identification of those respondents being made in the T.I. parade, their acquittal does not require any interference which is rather upheld but, as regards the accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, i.e., Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton, since the view so taken by the learned court below also being plausible not relying upon the identification of those respondents being made in the T.I. parade, their acquittal does not require any interference which is rather upheld but, as regards the accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are concerned, keeping in mind that they being identified by the inmates of the family, against accused- respondent No. 1 there being three identifications against accused-respondent No. 2 there being four identifications and the means of identifications torch light flashed being sufficiently proved also being considered by us to be sufficient as to identify; also keeping in mind that, admittedly, these two persons were known to the inmates of the prosecution side from before, their acquittal in connection with this matter u/s. 396 IPC stands setaside and since after the careful scrutiny of the evidence of the eye witnesses, particularly, P.Ws. 10 to 13, we come to the conclusion that the judgment of acquittal to these two accused-respondents requires interference, it is in that light that they stand convicted u/s. 396 of the I.P.C. because, in our considered opinion, the evidence pouring in against these two accused-respondents, the learned court below had made no effort as to sift the grain from chaffs and took easy course by acquitting these two accused-respondents as well without assigning any cogent reason. 17. Since accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2, i.e., Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton being convicted u/s. 396 IPC, now the question arises for deciding relating to the quantum of sentence to be imposed upon them as they have committed an offence coming under the purview of Section 396 IPC in which in course of dacoity two of the persons are shot dead. While imposing sentence, however, it has to be kept in mind that the occurrence is of the year 1981 and long nineteen years have rolled-up all through, they have suffered mental agony and the pangs of litigation. Keeping that in view, accused-respondent Nos. 1 & 2 after being convicted u/s. 396 IPC the judgment of acquittal against them being also set-aside they are, thus, hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each. However, the period undergone by them in course of enquiry and trial shall be set-off from the period of sentence so imposed. We, thus, direct that respondent Nos. 1 & 2 after being convicted u/s. 396 IPC the judgment of acquittal against them being also set-aside they are, thus, hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each. However, the period undergone by them in course of enquiry and trial shall be set-off from the period of sentence so imposed. We, thus, direct that respondent Nos. 1 & 2, namely, Sri Mahton and Suresh Mahton be taken into custody forthwith as to undergo the balance of sentence so imposed. 18. Before parting with it will not be out of place to mention that out of the remaining accused-respondents except respondent Nos. 1 & 2, two of them, namely, Chhotey Manjhi and Nagina Manjhi are behind the bars as also detailed in the ordersheet dated 4.7.2000 of this Government Criminal Appeal. Since their acquittal by the learned court below stands affirmed, they are discharged from the liabilities of their bailbonds and are directed to be set at liberty at once, if not wanted in any other case. This Government criminal appeal so preferred is partly allowed and is, accordingly, disposed of. The lower court records, so called for, be sent back to the court concerned at once for needfui along with the copy of this judgment for implementation, according to law.