BEHARI LAL PALERIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision against the order and judgment dated 6-9-1973 in Criminal Appeal No. 496 of 1972, affirming the conviction and sentence of the applicant Under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the applicant was Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Railway Protection Force and was [posted at Agra. On 17-5-1969. Sub-Inspector C. N. Mehrotra of Railway Protection Force at Agra Cantt. received information through an informer that many utensils and brasswares had been stolen away from the transhipment shed of Agra Cantt, in the night between May 14 and 15, 1969 and utensils were still in the Railway quarter occupied and resided by Behari Lai. He along with others first went to the police station and took a Head Constable with him. He also picked up Illahbadi and Babu Khan as witnesses. When they were near the quarter of the applicant they saw Nauhat Lai (who was co-accused) coming from the house of Behari Lai with some utensils (Exs. 3 and 33 ). He informed them that he had purchased the same from the house of Behari Lai. The Sufc-Inspector prepared recovery memo (Ex. Ja-7), He also recorded statement of Naubat Lai (Ex. Ka-8) and proceeded to the house of Behari Lai. He took search of his house. His storeroom was opened with a key produced by Behari Lai, 'his Sub-inspector re- covered three empty bags with railway marks and many utensils (Exs. 37 to 383) from his house, besides woollen clothes, other clothes and boxes etc. A recovery memo was prepared. Sub-Inspector Mehrotra conducted the investigation of the case. After completing the investigation he filed a complaint against the applicant and Naubat Lai who were duly tried. Naubat Lai admitted that he purchased the utensils from Behari Lai for Rs. 100. 00. He received the utensils from Behari Lai in lieu of his debts as Behari Lai owed Rs. 200. 00 to him. Behari Lai at first denied that there was any recovery of these articles from his house but later on he. admitted the recovery of clothes and utensils etc. from his house and he stated that he had purchased these articles from Morada-bad and Agra in connection with the marriage of his sisters. Obviously he did not accept the recovery of three bags from his house. The utensils were put up for test identification and were identified by the owners. Recovery had been proved. The learned Magistrate on the basis of the appraisal of evidence found the case proved against Behari Lai and convicted and sentenced him to two years' R. I. and to pay a fine of Rupees 2,000. 00. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to go further R. I. for 6 months. Naubat Lai was, however, acquitted as it was not proved that the two articles recovered from him were railway property. The order was confirmed in appeal. Feeling aggrieved the applicant has filed this revision.

(3.) BEFORE the lower appellate court, only following two points were argued. (1) copies of the statements of P. Ws. recorded during the enquiry were not supplied to the applicant. (2) statements of P. Ws. recorded during the enquiry were got signed by the P. Ws,