MARDICHAND DAYARAM JAIN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no substance in this revision application. The revision-petitioner original accused challenges the order of tha learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, dismissing his appeal against the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 30 th Court, Kurla, Bombay, convicting him for an offence under section 124 of the Bombay Police Act and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs 500/-.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that on 21 st March 1973 at about 2 30 p. m. Head Constable Sathe (P.W.2 and other constables noticed that the original three accused were carrying telephone cables OB a hand cart near Matunga police station. On suspicion these policemen accosted the original three accused and took them to the police station. They noticed that the cables were telephone cables belonging to Bombay Telephones. The police then contacted Mr. Kulkarni (P.W.I), the Assistant Enginebr of the Bombay Telephones, by writing to him on 22nd March 1973. Mr. Kulkarni went to the police station on 23 rd March 1973 and identified the telephone cables as belonging to the Bombay Telephones and worth Rs. 19,000/. An offence was registered. The investigation disclosed that accused No. 3 was only a cartman and accused Nos. 2 and 3 were the servants of accused No. 4 viz, the present revision petitioner who was actually concerned with the telephone cables. As no reasonable explanation was forthcoming from accused No. 4, all the accused were prosecuted for an offence under section 124 of the Bombay police Act.

(3.) The defence of accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 that they were only servants of accused No. 4 was accepted and they were acquitted. The defence of accused No. 4 was that he had actually purchased the cables in question from one Chunilal Devichand (D.W. 1) on 16-3-1973 for Rs. 9772.28 under bill Ex. 1. In support of that the accused revision petitioner also examined the said Chunilal Devichand