Back
PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Saddam Hussain – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Praveer Bhatnagar, J.
By way of filing present criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has assailed the judgment dated 28.02.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Ajmer in Criminal Appeal No.05/2021 (CIS No.50/21), whereby, the learned appellate court while dismissing the appeal of the accused-petitioner has upheld the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.02.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ajmer in Criminal Case No.6036/2018, whereby, the revisionist-petitioner was convicted and sentenced as under:-
| Under Section 379 I.P.C. | Three years' rigorous imprisonment. |
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 16.03.2018 complainant Ajay Kumar Jain lodged a written report at police station Sadar Kotwali, Ajmer stating therein that on 16.03.2018 at around 03:00 AM when he was going to the Temple, his car Maruti-800 bearing registration No.RJ01-C-9744 standing outside the house from last four days was stolen by someone. On the aforesaid report, an FIR No.56/2018 was registered and after usual investigation, charge-sheet under Section 379 I.P.C. was filed against t
The absence of independent witnesses during the recovery of stolen property raises reasonable doubt, making conviction unsafe.
In theft cases, possession of stolen property shifts the burden of proof to the defendant to establish lawful possession.
The court affirmed that circumstantial evidence, including voluntary disclosures leading to recovery, can suffice for conviction, emphasizing the importance of reliability even when witnesses turn ho....
A conviction under Section 379 IPC cannot be upheld on weak circumstantial evidence without direct supporting witnesses, especially if independent witnesses are hostile.
Possession of stolen goods shortly after theft creates a presumption of guilt, which the accused must rebut with credible evidence.
The accused is entitled to acquittal due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in the prosecution case concerning conviction under IPC sections.
The prosecution must prove that the accused knowingly received stolen property to establish guilt under Section 411 of IPC.
The presumption under Section 114(a) of the Evidence Act requires corroborating evidence to establish the recovery of stolen property, necessitating scrutiny of witness credibility.
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
