SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Cal) 550

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.
Mankeshwar Shaw – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
C.R.R. 2664 of 2011
Decided On : 12-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Achin Jana, Mr. Suman Chakraborty, Mr. Prasenjit Ghosh
For the Respondent: Mr. Avishek Sinha

The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 and the inapplicability of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to an offender under the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996.

Headnote:

Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act - Conviction under Section 3(a) - 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 and its application in the case. The court also referred to the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and its inapplicability to an offender under the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was convicted for unlawful possession of railway property under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996. The case originated from a raid conducted by the Railway Police Force, resulting in the seizure of railway materials from the petitioner's possession. The petitioner was subsequently convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and a fine.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the petitioner guilty of unlawful possession of railway property and upheld the conviction. However, the court modified the sentence to a fine of Rs.1 lakh, setting aside the sentence of imprisonment. The court also ruled that the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 was not applicable to the petitioner's case.

Issues: The key issues included the legality of the seizure, the ownership of the seized railway materials, and the applicability of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's offence under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 constituted his first offence, and therefore, the sentence should not be less than one year. The court also ruled that the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 was not applicable to the petitioner's case.

Final Decision: The revisional appeal was allowed in part, upholding the conviction but modifying the sentence to a fine of Rs.1 lakh. The petitioner was directed to deposit the fine within 3 months, failing which he would undergo the period of sentence as directed by the Trial Court.

JUDGMENT :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The instant revisional application is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by and dissatisfied a judgment and order of conviction dated 19.07.11 passed by the Learned Additional Session’s Judge, 2nd Court at Howrah in connection with Criminal Appeal 34/03, confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.09.2003 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court at Howrah in connection with the S.L. Case No. 121/98 arising out of R.P.F. ‘G’ Post/Santragachi Case No. 22/19 dated 14.08.1998, under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 whereby convicting the appellant for committing offence under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 and thereby sentenced the petitioner to suffer simple imprisonment for 30 days and to pay a fine of Rs. 1200/-in default thereof to suffer further imprisonment for 20 days.

2. The prosecution case in nutshell was that Sri M.K. Singh posted as Sub-Inspector of railway police force ‘G’ post Santragachi, South Eastern Railway lodged a written complaint against Arun Prasad and the present appellant alleging inter alia that ‘on 14.08.98 at about 3:00 hrs near bridge no. 13 in between Baltikuri and Bakranayabaz a raid was conducted by some Railway Police Force personnel and in the said raid one person was found moving suspiciously along with a gunny bag. The said person was arrested and a search was conducted upon him and 32 pen-droll clips were seized from his possession. The said articles were found to be the properties of Railway of India. Upon interrogation of the said person he reveled his name as Arun Prasad and he confessed his guilty. Moreover he also confessed that he had sold some of the stolen railway articles to one Mankeshwar Shaw. Accordingly the R.P.F. personnel raided the Go-down of Mankeshwar Shaw situated at Gangaram bridge, Dist – Howrah, wherefrom 38 pen-droll chips, 27 break locks and 10 M.S. Flat bearing plates, 15 steel keys and 25 fish bolts were seized. It was further alleged that all the above articles belong to the Railway of India and no proper document could be supplied by the petitioner in support of their lawful possession. Subsequenlty the appellant also confessed his guilt.’

3. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint the Railway Police Force initiated R.P.F. ‘G’ post/Santragachi Case No. 22/19 dated 14.08.1998 under Section 3(a) of Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996 against Arun Prasad and present petitioner Mankeshwar Shaw and after completion of the investigation final form of complaint no. 25/99 dated 08.07.99 was submitted against them.

4. However as the said accused Arun Prasad subsequently absconded, hence the case was filed against the said accused on 14.01.2001 and the present petitioner was placed on trial before the Learned Third Judicial Magistrate, Howrah to answer the charges under Section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1996, in the S.L. Case No. 121/98 arising out of R.P.F. ‘G’ Post/Santragachi Case No. 22/19 dated 14.08.1998.

5. The prosecution in order to substantiate the charges leveled and to prove its case against the accused person, examined all together 7 witnesses exhibited certain documents.

6. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that –

    i. The F.I.R was lodged on 14/08/1998 by the Sri M.K Singh, Sub Inspector of Railway Police Force, 'G' Post Santragachi, Southern Eastern Railway, Howrah against i) Arun Prasad and ii) Mankeswar Shaw (present petitioner), under section 3(a) of the Railway Properties Unlawful Possession Act, 1966, on the following allegations:

a. On 14.08.98 at about 3.00 hrs near bridge no.13 in between Baltikuri and Bakranayabaz a raid was conducted by some Railway police Force personnel and in the said raid one person was found moving suspiciously along with a gunny bag. The said person was arrested and a search was conducted upon him and 32 pen-droll clips were seized f

              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
              1
              2
              3
              4
              5
              6
              7
              8
              9
              10
              11
              SupremeToday Portrait Ad
              supreme today icon
              logo-black

              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

              qr

              Scan Me!

              India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

              For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

              whatsapp-icon Back to top