IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ram Krishna Gautam, J.
Arvind Parmar @ Bunty and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 5201 of 2018
Decided On : 30-07-2019
Indian Penal Code – Sections 380, 411, 413 – Theft Offence –Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 374 (2) – PW-1, lodged first information report for occurrence of theft, said to have been committed in the night which was got registered as Case Crime against unknown persons, appellant.2, was alleged to have made whereas appellant no.3, were said to have absconded, A joint recovery of golden ornament and cash, as written in recovery memo, was said to have been made from joint possession of accused-appellants, who were apprehended. First information report was got lodged whereas appellant nos. 1 and 2 said to have arrested by the PW-4 Recovery was also said to have been made from appellant nos 1 and 2, and appellant no.3 said to have fled from spot, whereas no such recovery there, except concocted and planted one. Co-accused, were discharged on basis of same evidence in Sessions Trialarising out of Case Crime whereas appellants, in present Appeal, have convicted and sentenced, vide impugned judgment. Prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, even then judgment of conviction passed. It was false recovery and false implication. Hence, this Criminal Appeal, with prayer for setting aside judgment, thereby acquitting the appellants–Held, Offence of theft was got registered by informant against unknown thieves. Subsequently alleged recovery of alleged stolen ornaments, with cash money, was said to have been made from convict-appellants. Offence of theft or taking of those articles from building, by convict appellants, were not proved by any witness and on the basis of possession and presumption, under Section 114, Evidence Act, offence under Section 380 was deemed to be proved whereas identification of alleged jewellery, with no specific mark of identification, was neither established by way of identification parade, or by way of proving before Trial court – Criminal Appeal is allowed. (Para’s 24, 27)
Facts of the case:
PW-1, lodged first information report for occurrence of theft, said to have been committed in the night which was got registered as Case Crime against unknown persons, appellant.2, was alleged to have made whereas appellant no.3, were said to have absconded, A joint recovery of golden ornament and cash, as written in recovery memo, was said to have been made from joint possession of accused-appellants, who were apprehended. First information report was got lodged whereas appellant nos. 1 and 2 said to have arrested by the PW-4 Recovery was also said to have been made from appellant nos 1 and 2, and appellant no.3 said to have fled from spot, whereas no such recovery there, except concocted and planted one. Co-accused, were discharged on basis of same evidence in Sessions Trialarising out of Case Crime whereas appellants, in present Appeal, have convicted and sentenced, vide impugned judgment. Prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, even then judgment of conviction passed. It was false recovery and false implication. Hence, this Criminal Appeal, with prayer for setting aside judgment, thereby acquitting the appellants.
Findings of the court:
Offence of theft was got registered by informant against unknown thieves. Subsequently alleged recovery of alleged stolen ornaments, with cash money, was said to have been made from convict-appellants. Offence of theft or taking of those articles from building, by convict appellants, were not proved by any witness and on the basis of possession and presumption, under Section 114, Evidence Act, offence under Section 380 was deemed to be proved whereas identification of alleged jewellery, with no specific mark of identification, was neither established by way of identification parade, or by way of proving before Trial court.
Result: Criminal Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Ram Krishna Gautam, J.
This Appeal, under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short hereinafter referred to as ''Cr.P.C.'), has been filed by the convict-appellants, Arvind Parmar @ Bunty Raja, Rajan @ Rajendra, and Raheem Khan, against the judgment of conviction, dated 28.7.2018 and sentences awarded therein by the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (U.P. Dacoity Affected Area), Lalitpur, in Sessions Trial No. 49 of 2013 (State vs. Arvind Parmar @ Bunty Raja and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1492 of 2012, under Sections 380, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur, whereby convict-appellants, Arvind Parmar @ Bunty Raja, Rajan @ Rajendra and Raheem Khan have been sentenced with seven years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/-, each, under Section 380 IPC and three years' rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs.5,000/-, each, under Section 411 IPC. In default of deposit of fine of Rs.10,000, they will have to serve six months' simple imprisonment and in default of deposit of fine of Rs.5,000/-, they will have to serve three months' simple imprisonment, with further direction for concurrent running of sentences and adjustment of previous incarceration, if any, in this case crime number, with this contention that the Trial court failed to appreciate facts and law placed before it and the judgment, 28.7.2018, of conviction and sentence, awarded therein, is illegal, perverse and against the weight of evidence on record. It was passed on the basis of surmises and conjunctures.
2. Niraj Nayak, PW-1, lodged first information report on 24.7.2012, for occurrence of theft, said to have been committed in the night of 21.7.2012 to 23.7.2012, which was got registered as Case Crime No.1492 of 2012, under Section 380 Indian Penal Code (In short hereinafter referred to as ''IPC'), against unknown persons, at Police Station-Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur. On 14.8.2012, arrest of Arvind Parmar @ Bunty Raja, appellant no.1, Jeetu Parihar, Rajan, appellant no.2, and Naval Ahirwar, was alleged to have been made whereas Shivam Tiwari, Arvind Pal and Raheem Khan, appellant no.3, were said to have absconded. A joint recovery of golden ornament and cash, as written in the recovery memo, was said to have been made from joint possession of accused-appellants, who were apprehended. First information report was got lodged on 24.7.2012, whereas appellant nos. 1 and 2 said to have been arrested on 14.8.2012 by the PW-4, Sunit Kumar. Recovery was also said to have been made from appellant nos 1 and 2, and appellant no.3 said to have fled from the spot, whereas no such recovery was there, except concocted and planted one. Co-accused, Arvind Pal, Jeetu Parihar, Naval Ahirvar and Shivam Tiwari were discharged on the basis of same evidence in Sessions Trial no.49 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No.1492 of 2012 whereas appellants, in the present Appeal, have been convicted and sentenced, vide impugned judgment. Prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, even then judgment of conviction was passed. It was a false recovery and false implication. Hence, this Criminal Appeal, with a prayer for setting aside judgment, thereby acquitting the appellants.
3. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA, appearing for the State and gone through the impugned judgment as well as record of the Trial court.
4. From very perusal of the record, it is apparent that Case Crime No. 1492 of 2012, under Section 380 IPC, was got registered at Police Station- Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur on 24.7.2012, at 19.00 PM, for an occurrence of 21/23.7.2012, at the house of informant-Niraj Nayak, situated at Mohalla Azadpura, District Lalitpur, within the area of Police Station-Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur, against unknown thieves, for commission of offence of theft of golden and silver ornaments and cash from the house of the i
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.