SHANMUGHAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision case by accused 2 and 3. Originally there were three accused. The first accused belongs to a village called Mohaza Paruvoor. The second accused is a vessel merchant, belonging to a nearby village. The third accused is an accountant under the second accused. The case of the prosecution is that accused 1 and 2 in furtherence to a common intention have stolen away five idols form the house of Kunjaya Ammal, grandmother of P. W. 1 Velusamy between January and April, 1982 by house breaking by night and that accused 3 has assisted accused 2 in disposing of the stolen properties. On 15th July, 1983, P. W. 2, the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to crime Branch, C. I. D. , had arrested accused 2 at Chintadripet at 4 p. m. and found in his possession of a bag M. O. 9 and Amman Idol M. O. 4 was found therein. Both M. Os'. were seized under mahazar Ex. P6. From the statement under S. 27 of the Evidence Act given by accused 2, P. W. 12 arrested accused 3 near Raja Annamalai Manram. From accused 3 he seized a box M. O. 8 containing four idols covered by a gunny bag M. O. 10. All the articles along with the key of the box were seized under mahazar Ex. P8. A case was registered under Crime No. 50 of 1983 under Ss. 41,and 192, I. P. C.

(2.) THE Investigating Officer consulted P. W. 9 an expert of the Archaeological Department who stated that the idols belonged to Seventeenth century. P. W. 12 therefore caused an advertisement to be issued in the press. THEreafter P. W. 1 Velusamy gave a Complaint Ex. P1 about the theft of the idols.

(3.) AS far as accused 2 is concerned, he contended that he having been charged under Ss. 457 and 380, I. P. C. and acquitted of those charges, cannot be convicted under S. 411, I. P. C. Learned counsel appearing for the prosecution contended that as per the provisions of S. 221, Crl. P. C. , and especially in view of the Illustration (b) under that section, the conviction under S. 411 was legal.