2006 Supreme(UK) 527

2006 (2) U.D., 508
High Court of Uttaranchal
Prafulla C. Pant, J.
Teerath Singh (Since deceased) and others - Appellants
Vs.
The State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 321 of 2001,
With Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 2002,
Decided on : 18-09-2006.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [ACT SECTION LIST] - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

A dacoity was committed in the intervening night of 9th and 10th October, 1974, in the Archeological Museum situated at Jageshwar Temple, District Almora. It is alleged by the prosecution that some 9-10 persons including accused Raj Kumar, Bali Ram (died during trial), Surta Nand Nautiyal (died during the period of appeal), Kabul Singh, one Jagdish Bahadur Saxena and Virendra Pal Singh along with others participated in the dacoity on said date. PW. 21 Keshav Dutt Bhatt (informant), the Chowkidar of the Museum of Archeological Survey of India (hereinafter referred as AS.I.) was assaulted by the dacoits at the time of commission of dacoity, and his hands and feet were tied with ropes and his mouth gagged with piece of cloth. He was threatened at the point of knife that he would be killed if he dared to raise alarm. The said Chowkidar was confined by the dacoits in a small room before they left the place of incident. P. W. 21 Keshav Dutt Bhatt, the Chowkidar sustained injuries in the accident. According to the prosecution story, dacoits broke open the doors of the godown of the Museum, and decamped with an 'Ashtha Dhatu' (eight metal) idol (material Ext. 3) of PAWAN RAJA The said idol was 4 feet 6 inches in height and 112 kilograms in weight. PW. 21 Keshav Dutt Bhatt lodged the First Information Report (Ext. A-72) of the incident in the morning, at about 9:45 AM., on 10-10-1974, with Police Station Almora, which is at a distance of some 40 kilometers' from Jageshwar Temple. In said report he mentioned that one of the bandits was Baram Singh, who was known to him.

Finding of the Court:

The trial court has rightly found accused/appellant Kabul Singh @ Khan @ Pahalwan guilty of the offence punishable under Section 395 of I.P.C. But, since, recovery of the stolen article is not made from him, as such, the conviction of accused/appellant Kabul Singh cannot be said to be lawful, as to the offence punishable under Section 412 of I.P.C., particularly, when he is found guilty of offence punishable under Section 395 I.P.C. Apart from what has been discussed above regarding evidence adduced by P.W.21 Keshav Dutt Bhatt, Chowkidar of the Museum; P.W.2 Hans Raj Singh; P.W.13 Prem Chand, there are other eyewitnesses who have adduced evidence against appellant Raj Kumar. For the reasons as discussed above, this Court is of the view that the trial court has rightly found accused/appellant Jaswant Singh guilty of offences punishable under Section 412 and 414 of I.P.C.

Issues: None

Ratio Decidendi: None

Final Decision: Criminal Appeal No. 321 of 2001 (old No. 2409 of 1985) of Jaswant Singh is liable to be dismissed, and is hereby dismissed. His conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court in respect of the charge of offences under Section 412 and 414 of I.P.C. is maintained. Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 2001 (old No. 2502 of 1985) of Kabul Singh is dismissed to the extent of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court in respect of the offence punishable under Section 395 of I.P.C. The same is maintained as recorded by the trial court. However, this Appeal of Kabul Singh is, partly allowed and, conviction and sentence recorded against accused/appellant Kabul Singh in respect of the charge of offence punishable under Section 412 of I.P.C., passed by the trial court, is set aside. He stands acquitted only of said charge. -Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 2002 (old No. 2414 of 1985) of Raj Kumar is dismissed to the extent of his conviction and sentence, passed by the trial court, in respect of the charge of offence punishable under Section 395 and 414 of I.P.C. The same, as recorded by the trial court is maintained. However, his Appeal is, partly allowed, in respect of the charge of offence punishable under Section 412 of I.P.C., and conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court to the extent of said offence is, set aside. He stands acquitted only of said charge.