{"id":168642,"date":"2010-03-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010"},"modified":"2016-05-24T09:41:50","modified_gmt":"2016-05-24T04:11:50","slug":"chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010<\/div>\n
                                                   1\n\n                          Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 298 of 2002\n(Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.04.2002 passed\nby Shri Chandra Prakash Asthana, learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag\nin Sessions Trial Case No. 172 of 1995.)\n                                         --------------\n<\/pre>\n
           1. Chhotan Mahto\n<\/p>\n
           2. Nuni Devi\n<\/p>\n
           3. Rijho Mahto\n<\/p>\n
           4. Dhaneshwari Devi\n<\/p>\n
           5. Baiju Mahto\n<\/p>\n
           6. Khannu Prasad @ Khannu Mahto                            ………\n<\/p>\n
                                                                 Appellants
\n                            Versus
\n      The State of Jharkhand                              ……….   Opposite Party\n<\/p>\n
                                 —————<\/p>\n
\n      For the Appellants         : M\/S. Deepak Kumar, Manoj Kumar,\n                                     Sanjay Pandey, Advocates\n      For the State              : Mr. D.K. Prasad, A.P.P.\n                                         --------------\n                                        PRESENT\n                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR\n\n\nBy court:      Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the\n      State.\n<\/pre>\n
      2.       This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of
\n      sentence dated 26.04.2002 passed by Shri Chandra Prakash Asthana, learned
\n      9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial Case No. 172 of
\n      1995, by which judgment, he found the appellants guilty for the offence under
\n      Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced appellant no.1, Chhotan
\n      Mahto, the husband of victim to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years
\n      and appellant nos.2, 3 and 4 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and
\n      appellant nos.5 and 6 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.
\n      However, he has acquitted the appellants from the charges under Sections
\n      304B\/34, 302\/34 and 201\/34 of the Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n
      3.       It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that it will appear
\n      from the evidences of witnesses especially P.W.1, Hemlal Mahto, P.W.2,
\n      Dhania Devi and other witnesses that all the brothers of appellant no.1, Chhotan
\n      Mahto were living separately and there is no question that they have demanded
\n                                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
any dowry from the father of the deceased. Moreover, prosecution witnesses
\nP.W.5, Jageshwar Prasad, P.W.6, Jhallu Mahto and P.W.7, Tuklal Mahto have
\nsubsequently stated that dowry was being demanded by only Chhotan Mahto
\nand there is no allegation of demand of dowry against the other appellants.\n<\/p>\n
        He has further submitted that the father of appellant no.1, Rijho Mahto,
\nwho was aged about 83 years at the time of judgment, is now dead, and as
\nsuch, a lenient view may be taken while passing the judgment.\n<\/p>\n
4.      On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer
\nand submitted that the trial court has already taken a lenient view and
\nsentenced three years rigorous imprisonment only for appellant       no.1 under
\nSection 498A of the Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n
5.      After hearing both the parties and after going through the evidences on
\nrecord, I find that the prosecution case was started on the basis of F.I.R. given
\nby the informant, P.W.8, Uttim Mahto before police stating therein that his
\ndaughter, Kunti Devi was married with the accused-appellant, Chhotan Mahto
\nabout seven years back and after sometimes of marriage, the husband,
\nChhotan Mahto and his family members started demanding Rs.10,000\/-. Since,
\nthe informant was a poor man, he could not fulfil the demand of Rs.10,000\/-,
\ndue to which, his daughter used to tortured and assaulted by the family
\nmembers. He stated that about one and a half months back, after giving birth to
\na son, when she came to her father’s house due to her being tortured, her
\nhusband came to his ‘sasural’ after fifteen days and forced Kunti Devi to go with
\nhim and today i.e. on 31.08.1994, he heard that she has died. The informant
\nwent to the ‘sasural’ of victim and saw the dead body lying outside the well of
\nHemlal Mahto. He alleged that his daughter was burnt to death for not providing
\ndowry demand and then she was thrown in the well.\n<\/p>\n
6.      On the basis of said fardbeyan, police registered a case for the offence
\nunder Sections 302\/201\/34 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation
\nsubmitted charge sheet under Sections 302, 201 and 304B of the Indian Penal
\nCode.\n<\/p>\n
7.      Since, the case was exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, learned
\nC.J.M. after taking cognizance, committed the case to the court of Sessions and
\nlastly the case was tried by 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh and he
\nfound the appellants guilty under aforesaid sections as stated above and found
\nthem guilty and convicted them thereunder.\n<\/p>\n
8.      It appears that in course of trial, the prosecution has examined ten
\nwitnesses.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.1 is Hemlal Mahto.\n<\/p>\n
                                        3<\/span><\/p>\n
        P.W.2 is Dhania Devi.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.3 is Ziria Devi.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.4 is Shanti Devi.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.5 is Jageshwar Prasad.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.6 is Jhallu Mahto.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.7 is Tuklal Mahto.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.8 is Uttim Mahto.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.9 is Jay Brat Roy, the doctor, who conducted the postmortem
\nexamination of the dead body.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.10 is Santosh Kumar Singh, I.O of the case.\n<\/p>\n
9.      It appears from the evidences of P.W.1, Hemlal Mahto, from whose well,
\nthe dead body was recovered, only stated that the dead body was recovered
\nabout 7-8 A.M. from the well belonging to him. The dead body was brought out.
\nHe stated that Kunti Devi was married about ten years back and she had good
\nrelations with her in-laws.\n<\/p>\n
10.     P.W.2, Dhaniya Devi only stated that the dead body was recovered from
\nthe well. She also stated that there was no fight in the house of deceased Kunti
\nDevi.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.3, Ziria Devi was declared hostile and nothing was asked from her.
\n        P.W.4, Shanti Devi was also declared hostile and she stated nothing.\n<\/p>\n
11.     P.W.5, Jageshwar Prasad, P.W.6, Jhallu Mahto, P.W.7, Tuklal Mahto and
\nP.W.8, Uttim Mahto have tried to support the prosecution case.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.5, Jageshwar Prasad stated that after the marriage, Kunti Devi was
\nstaying with her husband, but there was a demand of Rs.10,000\/- by the
\naccused-appellants i.e. father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law and they
\nused to torture the victim girl. He also stated that due to non-payment of dowry,
\nshe was burnt to death and thrown in the well.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.6, Jhallu Mahto stated the same thing, but at Para 18 of his cross
\nexamination, he stated that only accused Chhotan Mahto used to demand
\ndowry from the father of Kunti Devi.\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.7, Tuklal Mahto also stated that there was a general demand of
\ndowry and torture on Kunti Devi, but he also stated at para 2 of his examination
\nthat the accused Chhotan Mahto, in his presence, demanded Rs.10, 000\/- from
\nthe father of Kunti Devi.\n<\/p>\n
12.      P.W.8, Uttim Mahto, the informant also stated that all the accused
\npersons used to torture his daughter for non-payment of dowry demanded by
\nthe accused persons. He proved his statement as given in the F.I.R. and his
\nsignature as Ext.1. At para 17, he stated that accused Baiju works as a ‘Raj
\n                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
Mistri’ and Khannu does the work of ‘compounder’. At para 22, he stated that he
\ncannot say the date and time when the money was demanded.\n<\/p>\n
13.   P.W.9, Dr. Jai Brat Roy, who conducted the postmortem examination on
\nthe dead body of the deceased, found no external and internal injuries and he
\nstated that she died due to Asphyxia caused by drowning.\n<\/p>\n
      P.W.10, Santosh Kumar Singh, the I.O. has proved the fardbeyan and
\ninjury report as Ext.2.    He also proved the postmortem report and other
\ndocuments.\n<\/p>\n
14.   Thus, after hearing both the parties and after going through the evidences
\non record, I find that there was a general allegation of demand of dowry against
\nappellant nos. 2 to 6. The prosecution witnesses have made allegations that
\nthe demand of money was especially by appellant no.1, Chhotan Mahto. Since,
\nthere was no specific date and time of demand of dowry or allegations and
\nP.W.1 and P.W.2 have stated that other appellants were living separately at that
\ntime and P.W.7 has also admitted at para 9 that accused Khannu Mahto works
\nin Madhya Pradesh and Baiju Mahto works in Ranchi, in that view of the matter,
\nit seems that the demand of money i.e. Rs.10, 000\/- was only against appellant
\nno.1, Chhotan Mahto.\n<\/p>\n
15.   Accordingly, the appeal filed by Chhotan Mahto is dismissed and he has
\nalready served out the sentence and released by the trial court and the other
\nappellants i.e. appellant nos. 2 to 6 namely Nuni Devi, Rijho Mahto,
\nDhaneshwari Devi, Baiju Mahto and Khannu Prasad @ Khannu Mahto are
\nacquitted from the charges levelled against them.\n<\/p>\n
16.   Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part.\n<\/p>\n
                                                           [Pradeep Kumar, J.]
\nJharkhand High Court, Ranchi
\nThe 11th March, 2010
\nR.K.\/NAFR\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 1 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 298 of 2002 (Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.04.2002 passed by Shri Chandra Prakash Asthana, learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial Case No. 172 of 1995.) ————– […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-168642","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nChotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1328,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010"},"wordCount":1328,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010","name":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T04:11:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chotan-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-11-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chotan Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 11 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168642","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=168642"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168642\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=168642"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=168642"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=168642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}