VADIVEL Vs. PACKIALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first accused before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri in C.C. No. 31 of 198, tried upon a private complaint for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code along with two others, who was convicted for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, felt aggrieved by the judgement dated 30-8-89 canvasses the same for want of legality, propriety and validity in this criminal revision.

(2.) On 20-1-1982 at Moonumothemmozhi in Nagarcoil District the revison petitioner being the first accused along with his wife second accused, by name Bagialakshmi, approached P.W. 1 Bagialakshmi to get a gold chain weighing about five sovereigns and another chain weighing about 2 1/2 sovereigns to attend a marriage of their near relative in some other village by giving an assurance to the respondent to return the jewels after attending the marriage and on such representation they made the said Bagialakshmi to part with the jewels and thereafter, they never. returned the same as promised. But, later they pledged, the said jewellery in the bank as if they belonged to them. Even after, repeated demand and requests they deliberately failed to redeem and return the same. A complaint lodged by the said Bagialakshmi to the concerned police was since of no yield, was private complaint against the revision petitioner first accused, his wife and his father for abetment a lodged before the learned Magistrate, under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the offences under Section 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) By taking such complaint to file and after recording the evidence of five prosecution witnesses in accordance with precedual law and giving further opportunity to cross examine them in the context of the plea of defence taken by and on behalf of they accused and on consideration of the copy of the complaint, along with the receipt produced for redeeming the jewellery of the complainant, itself and the letter correspondence that took place between the parties, marked as Exs. P.1 to P.12, learned trial Magistrate found the first accused a lone as guilty for an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code as the complainant had established the guilt of the accused beyond the realm of doubt and that while doing so, he acquitted the second and third accused of both the offences.Consequently, learned Magistrate convicted the first accused and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and also imposed a fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.