Back
C.K.THAKKER
STATE OF HP – Appellant
Versus
JOGINDER SINGH – Respondent
What is the standard of proof required for conviction under Section 411 IPC, as stated in the judgment? What are the court's conclusions regarding the involvement of accused no. 5 in offences under Sections 411 and 471 IPC? What is the final decision of the court regarding the acquittal and the appeal in this case?
Key Points: - The prosecution must prove that the property was stolen, the accused had possession of the stolen property, and the accused knew it was stolen property for conviction under Section 411 IPC (!) (!) (!) . - The court found no evidence to prove theft or the accused’s involvement in offences under Sections 411 and 471 IPC, and upheld acquittal of the respondent-accused No. 5 by the lower appellate court (!) (!) (!) . - The Additional Sessions Judge’s acquittal of accused No. 5 and the setting aside of the Magistrate’s conviction and sentence were not interfered with; the appeal by the State was dismissed (!) .
: C. K. Thakker, C.J. (Oral) :- This appeal is filed by the State against the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, on February 28, 1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1995, quashing and setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded against the respondent by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, District Kullu, on August 4, 1995 in police Challan No. 339-1/92 and 96-II/93.
2. Three persons, namely, Brij Mohan, Lalit Kumar and Surinder Singh were prosecuted in pursuance of filing of FIR No. 56 of 1992 at SHO, Police Station, Kullu, under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). The case of the prosecution was that one Murari Lal (PW-8) reported to the police authorities that he was working as driver with one Mohinder Kumar (PW-2) and was driving his Maruti Van bearing registration No. HP-02-0600, which was registered with the Taxi Union at Kullu. On February 8, 1992, as per his usual practice, he stationed the said vehicle near P.W.D. office and dead house. The documents of the vehicle, Sterio and driving licence of the complainant were also in the vehicle itself. On the next mo
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
