JAGAT BAHADUR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, a police constable, was tried for an offence under Ss 170, 342 and 392, Indian Penal Code but was acquitted by the trying Magistrate of all these offences. The High Court to which an appeal was preferred by the State Government set aside the acquittal and convicted the appellant of each of these offences. It sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year in respect of the offence under S. 170 and to a period of six months for an offence under S. 342. In respect of the offence under S. 392 the High Court sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and further ordered that all the sentences should run concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case was that the appellant who was posted at Rewa took leave for 15 days from August 7, 1958 with a view to go to his village Hati in District Satna but instead went to Jabalpur wearing the uniform of a police head constable. There he met the complainant Ram Kumar , P. W. 1 at the Omti Bridge near the pan shop of one Saligram P. W. 2. He engaged him in conversation and learnt from him that the latter was from village Beldara, police station Maihar. He told Ram Kumar that a theft had been reported from that area and that he had come to Jabalpur to investigate into it and that Ram Kumar answered that particulars of the man wanted in connection with the theft. It may be mentioned that Ram Kumar was wearing a gold "mohar", threaded in a piece of string, round his neck. Questioned about it by the appellant he told him that he had received it as a present from his father- in- law. The appellant took Ram Kumar along with him from place to place and at one place he tried to relieve Ram of the gold mohar saying that it was a stolen article. Ram Kumar resisted and protested and so also did one Phoolchand who was there. The appellant then got into a rickshaw along with Ram Kumar on the pretext of taking him to the police station. Instead of stopping at the police station he asked the rickshaw to proceed to Katni road and dismissed the rickshaw puller after paying his fare. He then gave a beating to Ram Kumar and snatched the gold mohar from his neck. While they were standing on the road to Katni a motor truck happened to pass that way. The appellant stopped it and got into it along with Ram Kumar and proceeded towards Katni. After reaching the place the appellant sent off Ram Kumar to fetch a cup of tea for him. While Ram Kumar was away the appellant got into a goods train which happened to be leaving Katni railway station in the direction of Satna at that time and travelled in the brake van. Ram Kumar, finding that the appellant had escaped, lodged report with the police. Eventually the appellant was apprehended and challan. He denied the offence and said that he was falsely implicated and also said that it was a case of mistaken identity.

(3.) The main question was regarding the appellant's identity. There is voluminous evidence on the point which has been discussed fully by the High Court. On the basis of that evidence the High Court came to the conclusion that the person who had snatched away the gold mohar from Ram Kumar was no other than the appellant.