VERSINGH BHANDGA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Versingh was charged with and tried for the offence punishable under section 394/397 Indian Penal Code, before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, in Sessions Trial No. 143 of 1981, in his having on 19-2-1981 at about 2 P. M. between villages Kanheri and Bag while armed with a bow and arrows, robbed Shrikrishna P. \v. 1 of his h. M. T. wrist watch Siva, worth about Rs. 250, a two rupee bank note and a blue shirt worth Rs. 100. He has acquitted Versingh of the offence charged but finding him instead guilty of the offence punishable under section 411 Indian Penal Code, has sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for two years. He appeals.

(2.) THE facts of the case in short are that Shrikrishna P. W. 1 on 19-2-1981 at about 2. 20 p. m. was returning to Bag from village Kanheri. In the way suddenly a man armed with a bow and arrows came out of the bush and asked him to deliver him (appellant) whatever he (Shrikrishna)had at the point of being struck with an arrow. Shrikrishna P. W. 1 thereupon was relieved of his Siva wrist watch of 17 Jewels giving also dates with chain worth about Rs. 250, a blue shirt worth about Rs. 100 and a two rupee bank note. Shrikrishna P. W. 1 related the event to villagers at Anjanod and then at 6 p. m. at a distance of 20 kms. from the place of the incident at Bag lodged the first information report, The appellant was arrested on 31-8-1981 and from him a Siva 17 Jewels wrist watch giving dates with steel chain worth about Rs. 250 was seized. Shrikant pawar P. W. 3 conducted a test identification parade and in it Shrikrishna p. W. 1 vide the memo Ex. P. 3 identified the wrist watch to be his. A test identification for identifying the appellant was also conducted in which vide ex. P. 4 Shrikrishna P. W. 1 identified the appellant.

(3.) ON these facts when charged with and tried for the offence punishable under section 394/397 Indian Penal Code, the appellant denying his guilt explained that he had already been shown to the witness Shrikrishna p. W. 1 at the Police Station. He claimed that the watch in question had not been seized from him. He examined Krishnadutta Shukla D. W. 1 in order to prove but unsuccessfully that on the date of the incident he was confined in the jail at Dhar.