Possession of stolen property, coupled with failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for such possession and absconding after the theft, raises a presumption under Section 14, Illustration (a), Evidence Act that the person is retaining the stolen property, knowing it to be stolen.

This revision-petition is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner, against his conviction and sentence, under Sec. 411, I.P.C.

2. The prosecution was as follows :-

A temple of Dev Tungasi (hereinafter referred to as the temple) is situated in village Niari, Police Staton Gohar, Tehsil Chachiot, District Mandi. The temple was broken into on the night of the 23rd September, 1951 and from the Rath of the Dev, six gold plated mohars, two gold plated galpatas, one gold plated dodi, and one sankh were stolen. The theft was detected by Durga Singh PW. 7, on the 24th September. He informed Thakur Bass PW. 1, the pujari of the Dev. Thahur Dass lodged the report Ex. PA about the theft, with Head Constable Chandermani, P.W. 20, who was on patrol, in the ilaqa. The police suspected that the theft had been committed by the petitioner. A search was made for him, but he was not traceable. When all efforts failed to trace the petitioner, he was proclaimed an absconder.

3. On 17-9-62, nearly a year after the theft, in the temple, the petitioner had come to the house of Sant Ram in village Khani Phati, District Kulu. As the petitioner was a proclaimed offender, Sant Ram called Lamoardar Loharu Ram PW. 13, Chaukidars Moti Ram PW. 11 and Bhagat Ram P.W. 12, Sarpanch Gokal Chand P.W. 14 and Surat Ram, P.W. 10, for apprehending him. The petitioner was apprehended by these people. On the search of his person, five pieces of gold, Ex. P-10/1 to P-10/5, weighing 98 grams and other articles, were recovered. The petitioner was brought to the police station Banjar and handed over, along with the articles, recovered, from him, to S. H. O. Sewa Singh P.W. 15. Ultimately, the petitioner and the articles recovered, were brought to the police station Gohar, Tehsil Chachiot.

4. While in police custody, the petitioner had made the disclosure statement Ex. PW, 16/A. The statement was to the effect that the petitioner had concealed copper linings of mohars and galpatas and a sankh in Batahi forest and would discover them. In consequence of that statement, the petitioner had led the police party to the Batahi forest and had dug out, from under a tree, copper linings of galpatas Ex. P-14, and Ex. P-15 and copper linings of mohras Ex. P-16 to Ex. P-19, and the sankh Ex. P-13. From a nearby place, the petitioner had also dug out copper linings of mohra Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-12. The copper linings Ex. P-14 to Ex. P-19 were, identified by Thakur Dass PW. 1 and Lal Singh P.W. 5, as of the galpatas and of mohras of Dev Tungasi. The sankh Ex. P-13 was also identified of that Dev. The police had collected evidence that the petitioner hag been seen near the temple an the day of the theft.

5. As a result of investigation, the petitioner was challaned and charge-sheeted under Secs. 457, 380 and 414 I.P.C.

6. The petitioner denied that he had committed theft in the temple. He further, denied that he had made the disclosure statement Ex. PW-16/A or had made discovery of the copper linings and the sankh. He admitted that he had come to the house of Sant Ram on 17-9-52 and that the gold pieces, Ex. P-10/1 to Ex. P. 10/5, were recovered from him. His plea was that the gold pieces belonged to him, and he had purchased them from certain persons. The petitioner did any evidence in support of his plea.

7. The findings of the learned Magistrate, who had tried the petitioner, were that it had not been proved that it was the petitioner who had committed theft in the temple; that the petitioner had made the disclosure statement Ex. PW. 16/A and had in pursuance of. that statement, discovered the copper linings Ex. P-14 to Ex. P-19, and the sankh Ex. P-13; that Ex. P-14 to Ex. P.19 were copper linings of galpatas and mohras which dad been stolen from the temple, and that the sankh Ex. P-13, had also been stolen from the temple; and that the five pieces of gold, Ex. P-10/1 to Ex. P-10/5, recovered from the petitioner, did not belon