Back
V. SRINIVAS
Vinjamuri Satish – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. , Rep. By PP High Court, Hyderabad – Respondent
ORDER :
V. Srinivas, J.
Assailing the judgment dated 20.12.2011 in Crl.A.No.203 of 2010 on the file of the Court of learned III Additional Sessions Judge at Kakinada, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the judgment dated 18.06.2010 in C.C.No.322 of 2007 on the file of the Court of learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kakinada, for the offence under section 411 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”), the petitioner/accused No.1 filed the present criminal revision case under Section 397 r/w.401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
2. The revision case was admitted on 23.12.2011 and the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner was suspended vide order in Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3848 of 2011.
3. The shorn of prosecution case is that :
4. After completion of investigation, police laid a charge sheet against the accused No.1 and 2 and the same was taken on file and numbered as C.C.No.322 of 2007 on th
The prosecution must prove the accused's knowledge of the stolen nature of property to secure a conviction under Section 411 of IPC.
The prosecution must prove that the accused knowingly received stolen property to establish guilt under Section 411 of IPC.
Possession of stolen property requires knowledge of its stolen nature; conviction upheld with modified sentence to fine.
The court upheld the conviction for possession of stolen property, affirming the sufficiency of evidence while modifying the sentence to a fine of Rs.9,000.
Mere possession of stolen property is insufficient for conviction under Section 411 IPC without proof of the accused's knowledge that the property is stolen.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 411 IPC, establishing that possession of stolen property with knowledge constitutes guilt, and revisional powers do not allow re-examination of evidenc....
Possession of stolen goods can uphold a conviction under Section 411, provided mens rea is established, even without direct evidence of theft.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
