The non-examination of an Investigating Officer does not invalidate a conviction where the recovery of stolen property is proved beyond reasonable doubt through the consistent and reliable testimony of other material witnesses, particularly when no motive for false implication is established.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 04.07.2018 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI IN CRL.A.NO.66/2013 AND THEREBY SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.10.2013 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SOMWARPET SITTING AT KUSHALNAGAR IN C.C.NO.694/2001 THEREBY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FOR THE CHARGES FRAMED.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri Jagadish Baliga N., learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri K. Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

2. Revision petitioner is the accused who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.694/2001 for the offences punishable under Section 457 and 380 of Indian Penal code. The order of conviction and sentence was challenged before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.66/2013, which came to be dismissed by considered judgment dated 04.07.2018.

3.1. The complaint averments reveal that on 04.08.2000 at about 03.00 a.m., complainant and his family members had been to pilgrimage by locking the door of the house in a hired car.

3.2. When they returned on 05.08.2000 at about 07.30 p.m., they noticed that front door lock was opened and when they went inside the house, they noticed that some unknown culprits had broke open the ventilator with a grinding stone and illegally trespassed inside the house and broke open the lock of pooja room, bedroom and Godrej Almirah and they have stolen away sum of Rs.10,30,000/- cash and Gold ornaments and total loss was estimated at Rs.18,30,000/-.

4. On receipt of complaint, Kushalnagara Police after registering the case in Crime No.103/2000 investigated the matter and apprehended the petitioner. Based on his voluntary statement recovered the stolen articles namely, M.O.6 to M.O.14 and cash worth Rs.4,00,000/- vide M.O.17 and a necklace vide M.O.18 and other related articles and thereafter filed the charge sheet against the accused. The stolen seized articles were placed before the Magistrate vide P. F. No.31/2006.

5. Among the stolen seized articles, M.O.1 to M.O.3 and M.O.4 to 16 were handed over to the complainant with a direction to place it before the Court as and when directed.

6. On receipt of the charge sheet, learned Trial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences held against the accused and secured the presence of the accused and framed charges. Accused pleaded not guilty, therefore trial was held.

7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution proceeded to examine 19 witnesses as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19 and placed on record 25 documentary evidence which were exhibited and marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.25. Seventy five material objects were placed on record in support of the case of the prosecution which are marked as M.O.1 to M.O.75.

8. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, accused statement as is contemplated under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by Trial Magistrate wherein accused has denied all the incriminatory circumstances.

9. Thereafter, learned Trial Magistrate heard the arguments of the parties and on cumulative consideration of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record noting the fact that the stolen articles were seized by the police pursuant to the voluntary statement of the accused and sentenced as under:

“The accused is hereby sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable u/sec.