Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
P.K. Jain, J.
Ashok Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Union Territory of Chandigarh - Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 236 of 1996.
Decided On : 7 April, 1997
THEFT - SECTION 382, 411 IPC - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - IDENTIFICATION - TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE - SECTION 360 CRPC - PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT, 1958 - APPLICATION - Held, the petitioners were found in possession of stolen property with the knowledge that the same was stolen. They are guilty of an offence under Section 411 IPC only. The conviction under Section 382 IPC is set aside. The petitioners are convicted under Section 411 IPC and released on probation of good conduct.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were convicted of theft under Section 382 IPC for stealing gold ornaments and cash from the complainant's house. They were arrested several months after the incident, and the stolen property was recovered from them. The petitioners claimed that they were falsely implicated and that the stolen property was planted on them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were in possession of the stolen property, but that the evidence of identification was not reliable. The court held that the petitioners were guilty of an offence under Section 411 IPC (receiving stolen property) but not under Section 382 IPC (theft).
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners were guilty of theft under Section 382 IPC. 2. Whether the evidence of identification was reliable. 3. Whether the petitioners could be convicted of receiving stolen property under Section 411 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioners were not guilty of theft under Section 382 IPC because there was no evidence that they had taken the property from the complainant's house. 2. The court held that the evidence of identification was not reliable because the complainant and his wife had not identified the petitioners in a test identification parade. 3. The court held that the petitioners could be convicted of receiving stolen property under Section 411 IPC because they were found in possession of the stolen property and could not provide a reasonable explanation for how they came into possession of it.
Final Decision: The conviction of the petitioners under Section 382 IPC was set aside, and they were convicted under Section 411 IPC. They were released on probation of good conduct.
JUDGMENT
P.K. Jain, J. - Criminal Revision No. 236 of 1996 and Criminal Revision No. 253 of 1996 are directed against the judgment dated 27.3.1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh whereby the conviction of the petitioners for an offence under Section 382 Indian Penal Code recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh vide judgment date 21.1.1994 has been confirmed, although sentence has been reduced and each of the three petitioners has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- which fine stands already deposited.
2. The necessary facts for the disposal of these revision petitions are that the complainant Suresh Kumar along with his wife Smt. Kanta and children has been residing in House No. 2456, Sector 40-C, Chandigarh. On the night intervening 5/6th of May, 1990. he allong with his wife and children was sleeping in his house. His two servants were sleeping in the rear court-yard of the house. At about midnight one of his servants knocked at the gate to take drinking water. When Smt. Kanta opened the door, three Sikh young boys entered the house. They were of the age group of 18 to 20 years and their height was about 5-6 to 5-8". Two of them who were having knives in their hands caught hold of him and the third who was having pistol type article in his hand caught hold of his wife. They asked them to hand over whatever Smt. Kanta had. She took off and delivered her gold chain, gold ear-rings and gold ring to those boys. Then they opened the almirah of the store and took out an amount of Rs. 7000/Rs. 8000/- in cash lying therein. They extended a threat and escaped. One of their accomplices was standing outside the house to whom they could not recognize.
3. On the receipt of the information regarding the incident, S.I. Harbans Lal of Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh reached the spot, recorded the statement of Suresh Kumar Ex.PA, made his endorsement Ex.P.3/A thereunder on the basis of which formal F.I.R. was recorded, carbon copy of which is Ex.PW.3/B.
4. On 6.9.1990, petitioner Ashok Singh was apprehended in case FIR No. 4 of 1990 for an offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh. During interrogation he disclosed having committed the theft at the house of the complainant Suresh Kumar on the aforesaid intervening night. He further disclosed that the ear rings fell to his share which he had kept in his jhuggi. In pursuance of the disclosure statement, the pair of the ear-rings was recovered and was taken into possession after converting the same into a sealed parcel. On 11.9.1990, the complainant Suresh Kumar produced the petitioners Ramesh Kumar and Sandeep before the police. Ramesh Kumar produced one gold ring from the left pocket of his pant and the petitioner Sandeep produced one gold chain from the pocket of his shirt and handed over to the police. These articles were taken into possession after converting the same into sealed parcels vide two separate recovery memos. During investigation the recovered case property was got identified before the Executive Magistrate in accordance with the procedure laid down. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against all the three petitioners.
5. A charge under section 382 Indian Penal Code was framed against all the petitioners to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined seven witnesses including Suresh Kumar complainant (PW-1) and Smt. Kanta Rani (PW.2) who are star witnesses of the prosecution. Inspector Harbans Lal (PW.3), A.S.I. Surinder Kumar (PW.4), S.I. Balwan Singh (PW. 5) are connected with the arrest of the petitioners, recovery of the stolen articles and identification of the case property by the complainant and his wife before Shri Ashwani Kumar Sharma (PW. 7), the Executive Magistrate, Estate Office, Chandigarh.
7. In their statements recorded under Section 313 Crim
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
