GOPINATH SWAIN AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore upholding the conviction of the Petitioners Under Section 3(e) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' but reducing the sentence of imprisonment from three years to one year.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief may be stated. A consignment of XXX Rum manufactured by Amrut Distillery and meant for defence services personnel in 700 packages was being transported in a goods train from Bangalore to Guwahati. On 30.10.1973 before dawn the goods train made a brief halt at Kenduapada Railway Station. At about 6 a.m. the Assistant Station Master (P.W. 5) received a message from Bhadrak Railway Station to the effect that the seal of the wagon containing the consignment of XXX Rum was found broken and theft of goods was suspected, P.W. 5. passed on the information to two R.P.F. Rakhyaks Guru Charan Naik (P.W. 1) and Surendranath Pradhan (P.W. 4) who made a search of the locality and found that in a hut near the Railway yard some persons including the Petitioners I were present. Then they approached the hut, all except the Petitioners and Chadhei Pradhan (accused) ran away. P.Ws. 1 and 4 recovered 9 packages of XXX Rum from inside the hut where the Petitioners were present and on enquiry both of them confessed that they had broken open the wagon and had stolen the packages. Therefore, along with the goods recovered by them they brought the Petitioners and Chadhei Pradhan and produced them before P.W. 8. Officer -in -Charge of Railway Protection Force of Bhadrak. P.W. 5 submitted a written report contained in Ext. 2. Both 5 the Appellants confessed their involvement in the theft of the packages which was reduced into writing by P.W. 8 and was admitted into evidence as Exts. 3 and 4. The case was investigated and prosecution report was submitted.

(3.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate found that the nine packages of XXX Rum were, Railway property as defined in Section 2(d) of the Act, they were recovered from the possession of the Petitioners and that they had made confession before the R.P.F. staff. Accordingly he convicted the Petitioners and accused Chadhei Pradhan and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each. The Petitioners along With the other accused appealed before the learned Sessions Judge who confirmed all the findings recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate against the Petitioners, but entertained doubt with regard to the complicity of Chadhei Pradhan and while upholding the conviction of the former, acquitted the other accused.