A conviction requires adequate evidence of knowledge about the property being stolen; mere possession is insufficient for charges of cheating under IPC.

ORDER :

(G. BASAVARAJA, J.)

Revision Petitioner/accused has preferred this revision petition against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chikkamagaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) in C.C.No.923/2016 dated 29.11.2019 which is confirmed by the Court of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) in Crl.A.No.271/2019 dated 11.10.2021.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this revision petition are referred to as per their status and rank before the Trial Court.

3. The brief facts leading to this Revision Petition are that the complainant has filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against this revision petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 417 ,418 and 420 of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is alleged by the complainant that complainant company is a non-banking finance company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having a valid certificate of registration from the Reserve Bank of India, which permits complainant company to give loans to public against the pledge of gold ornaments. The complainant company has got more than 4000 branches all over the country including branch at Chikkamagaluru. The accused, on 01.12.2012 pledged gold ornaments weighing 51 grams and obtained loan of Rs.1,15,000/- from the complainant's company. Thereafter on 16.07.2013, Santhebennur police came to the complainant's company with accused for recovery of gold ornaments pledged in the finance company and seized them from the complainant. At the time of pledging gold ornaments, this accused had stated that they belong to him. Later, it is learnt that it is a stolen property in Crime No.135/2012 of Santhebennur Police Station. The accused has pledged gold ornaments which was stolen, by misrepresentation and has received Rs.1,15,000/- from the complainant. Thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Sections 417 ,418 and 420 of INDIAN PENAL CODE .

4. On the basis of averments made in the complaint PCR No.9/2015 and the documents produced by the complainant, the Trial Court took cognizance of the offences and recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and registered the case against this accused in C.C.No.923/2016 and summons was issued to him. (Learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chikkamagaluru has not passed any order as to the penal provisions of INDIAN PENAL CODE . However, the order sheet pertaining to C.C.No.923/2016 reveals that provisions of law is shown as Sections 417 , 418 and 420 of INDIAN PENAL CODE .) by concerned case worker without the order of the Court.

5. In pursuance of summons, the accused appeared before the Trial Court and enlarged on bail. Before framing of charge, learned Magistrate has recorded the evidence of PW.1. On the basis of his evidence, the Trial Court has held that there are sufficient material against this accused and accordingly charges are framed and the same was read over to the accused. Having understood the same, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. To prove the case of complainant one Pandu, Assistant Manager of Muthoot Finance Company is examined as PW.1 and 13 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P13. On closure of prosecution evidence, statement under Section 313 was recorded, but the accused has totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses. The accused himself adduced his evidence as DW.1 and no documentary evidence is produced by him.

7. Having hear