HARABAI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is preferred by the two accused of whom the first applicant was convicted under section 420 IPC and the second applicant under section 420 read with 120 -B IPC and sentenced to undergo S.L for six months and fine of Rs.4,000/ - each, in default to suffer S.L for 2 months. The prosecution case is that the second applicant has pledged some gold article with first applicant; that on 29.2.1988 one Panchram who is a co -accused took the second applicant to the house of the complainant and requested the complainant to purchase the gold article; that the complainant agreed to pay Rs. 7,000/ - to the second applicant promising that after disposal of the gold article he would withheld the amount of Rs. 7,000/ - paid by him together with his commission and pay the balance amount, if any, to the second applicant. It is further stated that when the complainant has taken that gold article to PW 2 who is a Gold Smith it was revealed that the said article is one of brass but not of gold.

(2.) ONE of the six persons who were prosecuted including Panchram the others were acquitted by the trial Court and the applicants herein were convicted and sentenced as stated above.

(3.) IN the absence of proof of seizure under Ex. P -2 and in the absence of proof of identity of the article seized from the complainant and the article produced before, PW 2, I hold that there is no clinching material to hold that the applicants In prosecution of their conspiracy have cheated PW 1 by dishonestly inducing the complainant to deliver the property.