MAIZUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgement of the Court was as follows:-

(2.) The prosecution case was that one silver plate was stolen from the Government House Calcutta, on the night of September 26, 1950, between 11 p.m. and 3 a.m. and that the present accused took the stolen property along with another person to a jeweller's shop and sold it there. The accused pleaded not guilty. His case was that he had nothing to do with the selling of the stolen property or for the matter of that with the theft.

(3.) The learned magistrate, who heard the evidence, accepted the prosecution case that this accused dishonestly helped in the disposal of stolen property and committed an offence under Section 414, Indian Penal Code. It was argued before us that the evidence against this accused consisted only of the testimony of an accomplice and so the conviction should be set aside. We have looked into the evidence and find that the poddar who identified this accused and another person who went, to sell the silver plate is not an accomplice. The mere fact that he was arrested by the police after the stolen property was recovered from his shop is not a reason to disbelieve his evidence. We are unable to accept the argument that when he purchased the silver at the rate of Re. 1 per told, when the market rate for pure silver was Bs. 1-14 per tola, he must have known that it was stolen property and should not have accepted it. If he had. knowledge or suspicion that it was stolen property, we have no doubt that he would have managed to buy it at a much lesser price.