IRFAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside order dtd. 19/4/2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Una in Criminal Appeal No.16 of 2012 confirming the judgment and order dtd. 7/9/2009 passed by the learned JMFC, Una in Criminal Case No.889 of 2008.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Parth Tolia for the petitioner and learned APP for the respondent State.

(3.) Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering para 5, 22 and 25 of the impugned order, what appears that the present petitioner has purchased utensils, which was said to have been stolen from the premises. The utensils were found vide discovery panchnama at Exh.39 taken at the instance of the co-accused. The co-accused took the police to the shop / Bhangar Dela of the present petitioner, where the utensils are found. So, discovery of the utensils comes through the discovery panchnama recorded u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The learned trial Court while convicting the present petitioner did not discuss the evidentiary value of discovery panchnama at Exh.39. Even otherwise, this discovery panchnama could be considered as a weak piece of evidence and may place as a link in the entire chain of the incident. What could be discovered is utensils u/s 27 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution is required to prove the ingredients of Sec. 411 of the IPC to prove the case against the petitioner accused.