Recovery alone is not sufficient to establish guilt in a case relying on circumstantial evidence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed u/s.397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 08.09.2017 made in C.A.No.170 of 2017 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Court, Erode, confirming the judgment dated 21.03.2017 made in C.C.No.41 of 2014 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode.)

This criminal revision case has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Erode, in C.A.No.170 of 2017, dated 08.09.2017, confirming the judgment and order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, in C.C.No.41 of 2014, dated 21.03.2017, convicting the petitioner [A2] for offence u/s.392 IPC and sentencing him to ten months rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.

2. The case of the prosecution is that

2.1. On 01.12.2013 between 10.30 a.m. and 11.00 a.m., PW-1 was going in a two-wheeler along with her daughter and the daughter of PW-1 was driving the two-wheeler. PW-1 was the pillion rider. At that point of time, two persons, who were coming from behind in a two-wheeler, pulled the chain that was worn by PW-1 and they fled the place. According to PW-1, it was a five pound gold chain. PW-1 gave a complaint (Ex.P1) to the Inspector of Police, North Police Station, Erode, on 01.12.2013 at about 01.15 p.m.

2.2. The further case of the prosecution is that the accused persons were arrested in a case in Crime No.189 of 2013 and after they were taken into custody, they gave a confession and based on the confession, certain articles were recovered and one such article was the gold jewels that were in possession of the accused persons. This recovery happened on 18.12.2013.

2.3. PW-1 was called to the police station and she identified the gold chain belonging to her and it was handed over to her [this gold chain was marked as MO-1].

2.4. Based on the complaint given by PW-1, a First Information Report came to be registered in Crime No.830 of 2013. The First Information Report was marked as Ex.P7. The investigation was taken up by PW-6 and he came to the scene of crime and prepared an observation mahazar marked as Ex.P2 and rough sketch marked as Ex.P8. The Investigation Officer also recorded the statement of witnesses u/s.161(3) Cr.P.C. Thereafter, PW-6 was informed that the accused persons were arrested in a different case and based on their confession, various articles were recovered and one such article was a gold chain. PW-6 immediately contacted the Modakurichi Police Station where Crime No.189 of 2013 was investigated. He also took steps to arrest the accused persons under PT warrant.

2.5. The investigation was thereafter taken over by PW-7. On completion of all formalities, ultimately, the final report came to be filed before the trial Court.

2.6. Copies were served on the accused persons u/s.207 Cr.P.C. The trial Court framed charges against the accused persons. As against A1, the charge u/s.392 r/w 109 IPC was framed. Insofar as A2 is concerned, charge u/s.392 IPC was framed. The accused persons were questioned on the charge and they denied the same as false.

2.7. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 7 and marked Exs.P1 to P13 and identified and marked MO-1 and MO-2. The incriminating evidence that was gathered during the course of trial was put to the accused persons when they were questioned u/s.313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. and they denied the same as false.

2.8. The trial Court, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, came to a conclusion that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubts and accordingly, the accused persons were convicted and sentenced.

2.9. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner filed an appeal and the same was heard by the II Additional Sessions Court, Erode