STATE OF KERALA Vs. KUTTAN MOHANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The house of a Professor was burgled around midnight on 8-9-1984. Two buckets and two vessels (aluminium) besides one candle stand (made of brass) were stolen from that house. During investigation it was revealed that the burglary was committed by the two respondents by entering into the building after breaking the bars of a window of the house. The respondents were tried for the offences under Ss. 457 and 380 read with S. 34 of the I.P.C., but the trial court found them not guilty and acquitted them. Hence this appeal by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State of Kerala with special leave granted by this Court.

(2.) Although the Professor (P.W. 1)came to know of the burglary by next morning, he did not report the matter to the police. But the police came to know of it, when the respondents were interrogated by the Sub Inspector of Police, Percorkada, who arrested them in connection with some other crimes, during the last week of Nov. 1984. Hence the present case was registered against them and the stolen articles were recovered by the police from the shop of P.W. 3. After completing the investigation, the case was charge-sheeted.

(3.) The trial Magistrate did not rely on the testimony of P.W. 1 mainly for the reason that he did not report the matter to the police. The learned Magistrate has observed that "the police station is only 2.5 kms away from the residence of P.W. 1; he is an educated gentleman working as Professor in the Mar Ivanious College, Naianchira, Trivandrum; naturally being an educated man he had the duty to inform the matter to the police; he did not do so; the reason for the non-information to the police is best known to him alone". Another reason advanced by the learned Magistrate for acquitting the respondents is that "as there was no counsel to defend the accused, the evidence of witnesses cannot be believed as such since They were not cross-examined".