JUDGMENT : This appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.08.2006 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-VI, Hazaribagh in connection with Sessions Trial No. 254/2005, corresponding to G.R. No. 1852/2004 (arising out of Giddi P.S. Case No. 45/2004) whereby the appellant-Santosh Kumar Satnami @ Bangta has been held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 302/376 of the Indian Penal Code but stood acquitted for the offence under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and also to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of making payment of fine further imprisonment for one year. He has also been sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and also to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of making payment of fine further imprisonment for six months. 2. The prosecution case as it appears from the fardbayan of Faguni Devi recorded on 08.08.2004 at about 8 hours in brief is that on 07.08.2004 at about 8 p.m. the appellant-Santosh Kumar Satnami @ Bangta in a drunken state reached to the house of the informant. It is disclosed that the appellant was in visiting terms to the house of the informant. Doli Kumari, aged 04 years, who happens to be grand daughter of the informant was familiar with the appellant-Santosh as he was pleasing her by giving Chocolate and Biscuit whenever he used to come. On that very date he took Doli Kumari with him in order to give her Chocolate but did not return. Doli Kumari was not traced out till night. In course of making search, the informant could learn from Safique Mian that dead body of Doli Kumari is lying within a bush near Tipla Mines. The informant with her family members rushed to the place and found Doli Kumari lying dead in naked condition. Injuries on her vagina and neck were noticed by the informant and other witnesses. Thereafter fardbayan of Faguni Devi was recorded and a case being Ramgarh (Giddi) P.S. Case No.45/2004 dated 08.08.2004 under Sections 302/201/376 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against Santosh Satnami. Investigation was carried out and the appellant was apprehended. Injuries on her vagina and neck were noticed by the informant and other witnesses. Thereafter fardbayan of Faguni Devi was recorded and a case being Ramgarh (Giddi) P.S. Case No.45/2004 dated 08.08.2004 under Sections 302/201/376 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against Santosh Satnami. Investigation was carried out and the appellant was apprehended. After the appellant was arrested, he gave his confessional statement disclosing involvement of one more accused Golkuj Marandi @ Manjhi. After due investigation charge-sheet against both the accused was submitted, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of sessions and registered as Sessions Trial No. 254/2005. 3. The appellant-Santosh Kumar Satnami @ Bangta along with co-accused Golkuj Marandi @ Manjhi was put on trial. The prosecution in order to substantiate charges, examined altogether 07 witnesses whereas no witness on behalf of the defence was examined. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge at the conclusion of trial did not find sufficient material against co-accused Golkuj Marandi and accordingly acquitted him from all the charges levelled but held the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as indicated above and hence this appeal from jail. 4. Learned Counsel Mr. Navin Kumar has been appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court but today he is not present and, therefore, Mr. Rishi Pallav, has been requested to assist the Court on behalf of the appellant. He has submitted that evidence of Faguni Devi-P.W. 1 (Informant) and Kamli Devi (P.W. 2), who happens to be the mother of the deceased, are not consistent. Learned Trial Court has committed error by placing reliance on the statement of aforesaid two witnesses for reaching to the conclusion of the guilt of the appellant. The informant in her cross-examination in para 5 has stated that she has raised alarm but nobody turned up to extend help. This part of story does not find place in her fardbayan. P.W. 2 has also repeated the same fact that they had raised alarm but no heed was paid by any one. These two witnesses have also tried to conceal that the appellant was having some relation with P.W. 2. Statement of P.W. 1 also does not find support from the statement of Md. Safique (P.W.6). P.W. 2 has also repeated the same fact that they had raised alarm but no heed was paid by any one. These two witnesses have also tried to conceal that the appellant was having some relation with P.W. 2. Statement of P.W. 1 also does not find support from the statement of Md. Safique (P.W.6). According to the statement of P.W.1, she could learn about the dead body of Doli Kumari from Md. Safique but Md. Safique admits in his deposition that he had not seen the dead body rather he had heard about it. At best it could be said that it is a case of last seen. No eye-witness has come forward though the occurrence took place within mines area and the deceased was being taken from her house. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the State has opposed the argument and submitted that clinching evidences are available on record that the appellant was familiar with the deceased-child and he took her with him on the pretext to provide chocolate but did not return. The appellant was also found absconding from the date of occurrence and after his arrest he had given his confessional statement Ext. 5. The prosecution witnesses have fully supported the case as disclosed in the fardbayan. The postmortem report corroborates commission of rape and murder of the child which caused due to throttling. The appellant has committed heinous crime by committing rape on a girl aged about 04 years and also by killing her in brutal manner. There is no merit in this appeal. 6. We have gone through the First Information Report, deposition of witnesses, documents marked as exhibits, impugned judgment as well as lower court record. The informant has made out a case that the appellant was in visiting term to her house and he was familiar with deceased-Doli Kumari. On the date of incident, on the pretext to provide chocolate and biscuit, the appellant took Doli Kumari but did not return. A search was made by the informant and other family members but they could not succeed to trace out either Doli Kumari or the appellant. The appellant was also not present in his house. On the next day, in course of search, the informant and witnesses could learn from P.W. 6 (Md. Safique) that dead body of Doli Kumari has been lying within a bush near Tipla Mines. The appellant was also not present in his house. On the next day, in course of search, the informant and witnesses could learn from P.W. 6 (Md. Safique) that dead body of Doli Kumari has been lying within a bush near Tipla Mines. The informant and other witnesses reached to the place and saw the dead body of Doli Kumari in naked condition. Presence of blood was noticed on her vagina. They had also noticed injuries on the neck. Fardbayan of P.W. 1 was recorded and the dead body was sent for its postmortem examination. P.W. 1 (informant) happens to be the maternal grand-mother whereas P.W. 2 is the mother of the deceased. The informant in her fardbayan has clearly stated that Lala Ram (P.W. 5), Kamli Devi (P.W.2) were present in the house when Doli Kumari was taken by the appellant. The evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 5 is consistent on the point that the appellant on the pretext to provide chocolate and Biscuit took Doli Kumari with him and thereafter they became traceless. On the next day, dead body of Doli Kumari was recovered from bush situated near Tipla Mines. Fardbayan of P.W. 1 was recorded, case was registered and dead body was sent for its postmortem. The postmortem was conducted by a Medical Board of which P.W. 3 and P.W. 4 were members. According to postmortem report multiple bruises on both side of neck were present, hymen ruptured & fresh wound with blood was noticed, red blood clot were present in vagina. A definite opinion by both the Doctors has been given that the deceased was subjected to sexual assault and death was due to asphyxia due to throttling. 7. As pointed out by the Counsel appearing for the appellant that P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 have deposed in Court that they had raised alarm but nobody turned up and that creates doubt on the veracity of statement of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. We have carefully examined the statement of P.W.1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 5. They have given consistent statement that the deceased was taken by the appellant and the appellant was familiar with the deceased and other family members. From perusal of said part of cross-examination, it is not very clear that 'Halla' was made either at the time of taking the child or when the dead body was recovered. They have given consistent statement that the deceased was taken by the appellant and the appellant was familiar with the deceased and other family members. From perusal of said part of cross-examination, it is not very clear that 'Halla' was made either at the time of taking the child or when the dead body was recovered. It is not very clear so we do not feel inclined to give importance to this part of the evidence of those witnesses. P.W. 6 (Md. Safique) has supported this fact that he had gone to enjoy tea at 'Tea Stall' where he could learn about the presence of dead body of a female child, therefore, he supports this part of evidence that he was also aware about the presence of dead body of a female child. Narayan Prasad (P.W. 7) happens to be the Investigating Officer and he has fully supported the investigation done by him. He has proved fardbayan (Ext. 3), endorsement made on the fardbayan (Ext. 3/1), inquest report (Ext. 4), confessional statement of appellant (Ext. 5). The Investigating Officer has also stood to the test of cross-examination. Considering the evidence available on record, we do not feel inclined to interfere with the findings of the Trial Court. We do not find any merit in this appeal and the same stands dismissed. 8. The Member Secretary, Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority is directed to pay the required fee to the learned Counsel Shri Rishi Pallav, who has assisted the Court in disposal of this appeal, which has been preferred from jail. Appeal dismissed.