MAHENDRA PUKHARAJ CHAVAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Salvi for the petitioner and Mr. D. T. Palekar for the Respondent No.1. Although the matter is on the board of this court since long, Mr. S. R. Chitnis, counsel for the respondent No.2 is absent. Consequently, I have decided the matter with the assistance of learned counsel present. By this revision application, the petitioner impugns the judgment and order dated 17.7.1992, passed by the VIIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune, in Criminal Appeal No.166 of 1989, whereby that part of the order dated 20th September, 1989, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.4, Pune, directing the Muddemal property to be given to the complainant Shrikrishna Laxman Gadgil, was confirmed. The relevant facts shortly stated are as under :- The complainant Shrikrishna Laxman Gadgil has a shop of silver and gold at Narayan Peth, Pune. On 5.2.1985, the complainant received message from Abasaheb Garware on telephone that he wanted 22 tolas of gold which would be collected by his P. A. Mr. K. S. Joshi (Original accused) and the cheque would be sent thereafter. At about 11.30 a. m. , the original accused came and the complainant handed over to him 21 gold rings and one Got. Thereafter, the complainant waited for two days for cheque from Abasaheb Garware and when he did not receive the same, he telephonically contacted him. At that time, Abasaheb Garware's P. A. informed him that no one was sent by them to take delivery of the gold. The complainant realised that he had been cheated but did not lodge his F. I. R. because he did not want to damage the reputation of Absaheb Garware. On 20.6.1987 or 22.6.1987, the complainant read a news in a daily newspaper 'sakal' about the arrest of S. K. Joshi who had cheated Nagarkar Saraf by impersonating himself as P. A. of Abasaheb Garware. Hence, the complainant lodged a complaint with the police after about2.1/2 years of the incident.

(2.) DURING the course of investigation, S. K. Joshi (Original accused) was arrested and he informed the police that he had sold the said gold to one Mahendra Chavan (Original petitioner ). Consequently, police went to the shop of Mahendra Chavan and recovered two gold ingots therefrom.

(3.) THE appellate court in appeal filed by the petitioner also found the order of the trial court to be just and proper.