STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KAMA KALU PALAS BHIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent-accused was tried on the allegation that he had committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, to wit, he had purchased a shirt of the price of Rs. 15/- for Rs. 7/-, knowing that shirt to be a stolen property. This allegation was an off-shoot of the complaint filed on 7th August, 1977 to the effect that there was a theft committed in the house of one Kisborsinh Nathusinh, situated at Debgarvad Sahod, at about 11.00 p.m. on 8.2.1977 and that several items consisting of jewellery, vessels etc. were stolen. The allegation is that the shirt was one of the stolen items in this theft which was purchased by the respondent-accused, knowing it to, be a stolen property.

(2.) The prosecution examined one witness, Dayaram Manik (Exh. 5), who did not support the prosecution. The prosecution then applied vide Exh. 6 to issue summons on certain other witnesses which application was rejected by the learned Magistrate, who then recorded the judgment of acquittal. The prosecution-grievance is that it was not given sufficient opportunity to prove the offence. It is relevant to remember that the offence occurred on 7. 8. 1977 and this application for summoning the witnesses was submitted by the prosecution on 8.11.1979. It is further necessary to remember that this was not the first date of hearing. There were several adjournment the meantime and on 15-9-1979 the earlier application to summon witnesses was in fact granted by the learned Magistrate. The application to summon the witnesses which was rejected by the learned Magistrate was in fact a second application. I do not accept, therefore, the prosecution grievance that the learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing its application.

(3.) There is thus no merit in this appeal and I dismiss it.