HEERALAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assailing the legality, validity, correctness and judicial propriety of the judgment dtd. 30/9/2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) {for short ' ASJ'} in Criminal Appeal No. 19/2009 by which the learned ASJ has upheld the judgment of conviction and award of sentence dtd. 22/8/2009 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) {for short ' JMFC'} in Criminal Case No. 1577 of 2008, the applicant has preferred this revision under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 {for short 'Cr.P.C'}.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that in the intervening night of 12/13/9/2008 when Sharad Agrawal had gone out of his house, applicant with intention to commit theft entered the house situated at ward no. 10, main road, Gandai from the kitchen door. On seeing that the cupboards were opened and the goods were spread over, Rajesh Kumar Yadav servant made a report to the police upon which Crime No. 245/2008 was registered and during course of investigation on the memorandum of applicant one gold necklace, one gold biscuit, one gold necklace, two gold ginni, one pair of silver anklet were seized. From Shymlal Agrawal owner of Subhash Jewelers, Gandai one melted gold ball was seized. The applicant sold two gold rings and one gold locket to Shyamlal Agrawal who melted the gold. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. The applicant was charged for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 457, 380 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 {for short IPC}. The applicant denied the charges. The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses in support of the case. Statement of applicant under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which he has stated that he has been falsely implicated and he is innocent.

(3.) The learned JMFC after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence brought before it convicted the applicant under Sec. 457 of IPC and sentence him to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.1000.00 fine and in default of payment of fine three months additional rigorous imprisonment was imposed. For offence under Sec. 380 of IPC three years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.1000.00 fine and in default of payment of fine three month additional rigorous imprisonment was imposed. Both the sentence was directed to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and award of sentence, the applicant preferred an appeal under Sec. 374 of Cr.P.C. before the leaned Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). The appeal was heard by the learned ASJ and after due consideration the same was dismissed and the conviction and sentence awarded to the applicant was maintained/upheld.