HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Reserved on 27.09.2021

Pronounced on 22.10.2021

CRR No. 53/2012

Ved Parkash and another

.....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

Through :- Mr. M. L. Gupta, Advocate

v/s

State of J&K

.....Respondent(s)

Through :- Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy AG

Coram:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1.

The present criminal revision petition has been filed by the

petitioners against the judgment dated 11.07.2012 passed by the

learned Sessions Judge, Udhampur (hereinafter to be referred as the

appellate court, whereby the judgment dated 10.06.2011 passed by

the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udhampur (hereinafter to be

referred as the trial court) was upheld but sentence was reduced for

commission of offence under section 457 RPC.

2.

The petitioners were initially convicted by the trial court vide

judgment dated 10.06.2011 (supra) for commission of offences under

sections 457 and 380 RPC and were sentenced under section 380

RPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year and

under section 457 RPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two

years. Besides, each of the petitioners was also directed to pay fine of

2

CRR No. 53/2012

Rs. 500/ each under section 380 RPC and Rs. 1000/ each under

section 457RPC. Being aggrieved of the same, the petitioners

preferred the appeal before the appellate court. The learned appellate

court upheld the conviction vide judgment dated 11.07.2012 (supra),

however, reduced the sentence imposed upon the petitioners under

section 457 RPC from two years to one year and sentence imposed

under section 380 RPC was maintained.

3.

The petitioners being aggrieved of both the judgments has preferred

the present criminal revision primarily on the ground that PW

Rajinder Gupta, who is a witness to the disclosure memo, has

categorically stated that in his presence the petitioners were not

questioned but the police had disclosed to him that the

accused/petitioners have admitted their guilt and further that PW

Romesh Chander has categorically stated that when the police

recovered the articles then he was informed, as such, the stolen

articles were not recovered in his presence. In short, the sole

contention of the petitioners is with regard to the validity as well as

admissibility of the disclosure memos as well as recovery memos.

4.

Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the present revision are that

FIR bearing No. 496/1998 for commission of offences under sections

457 and 380 RPC was registered on 29.12.1998 at 1605 hours

pursuant to the oral report made by Romesh Chander S/o Bagh Mal

resident of ward No. 4, near Salathia Chowk, Udhampur. It was

stated that his bakery shop is situated near Salathia Chowk and said

shop was being run by his son and in routine, he closed the shop last

3

CRR No. 53/2012

evening and went to the home. In the morning, it was found that the

door of the shop was broken and the same was done in the night

intervening 28-29 of December, 1998 and on checking, it was found

that two sacks of Medha (white flour) weighing 170 Kg and one and

half tin Vanaspati Ghee weighing 22 Kg valuing total Rs. 2600/-

were stolen. The investigation was conducted by PW 5-Arjun Singh

Chib PSI and during the course of investigation, the petitioners were

arrested and they disclosed about the stolen articles regarding which

separate disclosure memos were prepared and thereafter, the stolen

articles were recovered. After the completion of the investigation, the

challan for commission of offences under sections 457 and 380 RPC

was filed against the accused-petitioners before the trial court and

thereafter, the charges were framed against the p