BANSILAL NARBHERAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is convicted for an offence punishable under sec. 380 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I. for four months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250.00in default to suffer R.I. for fifteen days in Criminal Case No. 1072 of 1980 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Baroda. He filed Criminal Appeal No 5 of 1981 which came to be dis- missed by the Additional Sessions Judge Baroda on 26-2-1981. Thereaf- ter this petition is filed from jail.

(2.) We have gone through the record and the evidence disclosed that the complainant-Dr. Chandrakant Govindlal was deprived of his Tape- recorser on 27-10-1979. He is a person reflecting at No. 9 Shakti Krupa Society R. V. Desai Road Baroda. He had left his house at about 9-00 A.M. for his dispensary. His wife was in the kitchen. When he returned at about 12-30 P.M. he learnt that from drawing room the tape-recorder was missing. He lodged a complaint. During investigation this tape-recor- der came to be produced by witness Madhusudan Nagindas in presence of the panchas. The complainant identified the tape-recorder and therefore it was established beyond doubt that the tape-recorder was a stolen property.

(3.) Further evidence disclosed that this Madhusudan had purchased the taperecorder for Rs. 1225.00from witness Robert Reman. There was sufficient evidence to establish this aspect of the case because there was a receipt and the independent witnesses deposed to that aspect of the case. Now therefore the evidence fully established that Robert sold the tape-recorder to Madhusudan and Madhusudan was found in possession of the tape-recorder. The evidence of Robert showed that he had purchased several tape-recorders from one Babulal Narottamdas Patel. This Robert is running a cycle shop at Baroda. According to him be knew radio re- pairing as well. He deposed that the accused used to come to him to take bicycle on hire and the accused gave his name as Babulal Narottamdas Patel. Thereafter according to Robert this Babulal once came to sell a tape-recorder and he purchased it. The accused thereafter sold other seven tape-recorders to him. Ultimately the police showed one photograph to this Robert and Robert identified that person to be the person from whom he had purchased seven tape-recorders and who had given his name as Babulal Narottamdas. The person whose photograph was shown to Robert was arrested. That person is the accused. Therefore according to the evidence of Robert he purchased seven tape-recorders from the accused. This story was believed to begin with by the police and therefore the person whose photograph was shown to Robert was arrested and put in as an accused person. He was prosecuted and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Baroda accepted the evidence of Robert and convicted the accused for the offence punishable under sec. 380 of the Indian Penal Code and The conviction is confirmed.