NAZIR ANNACHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the offence under section 411 of the Indian Penal Code a minor offence vis-a. vis section 380 of the I.P.C. ? Can one be convicted for the former offence without a specific charge accusing him of that offence and based on charge under section 380 for which he faced the trial? These are some of the questions posed in the present revision.

(2.) The appellant is the account accused in C.C.No 83/89 on the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate - 1. Ernakulam. He is aggrieved that though the conviction entered against him by the trial court for offence under section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was set aside in section Crl.A. 141/92 by the Third Additional Sessions Court. Ernakulam the learned Sessions Judge proceeded to convict him for the offence under section 411 of the I.P.C.

(3.) Sri. C.B. Sreekumar who argued the case of the appellant submitted that in the absence of any charge under section 411 of the I.P.C. framed against the second accused, there was no question of convicting him for the said offence. It is also his case that the ingredients of section 411 of the I.P.C. stand unestablished in the case in so far as there is no evidence adduced to show that the second accused received stolen properties from the other accused. What is to be considered, therefore is whether there is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the judgment of the appellate court.