( 1 ) IN Sessions Case No. 6 of 1987 before the City Sessions Judge Ahmedabad respondent No. 1 Nareshbhai was charged for the offences punishable under Sec. 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 380 read with Sec. 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No. 2 Kalpanaben the daughter of the complainant was charged for the offence punishable under Sec. 380 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No. 3 - Ramniklal is the goldsmith who had purchased the stolen ornaments. He was not charged for any offence before the trial Court but he is joined as a party-respondent as the learned Sessions Judge has ordered that muddamal article No. 1 which is the golden ingot be handed over to him as he has purchased it bona fide by paying full market price to respondent No. 1 Naresh. By the judgment and order dated 9/02/1987 the learned Sessions Judge had convicted the respondent No. 2 for the offence punishable under Sec. 380 of the Indian Penal Code but had acquitted the respondent No. 1 for the offences for which he was charged. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said judgment and order the State has filed this appeal against the impugned order of the learned Judge for return of m