BHIMA SAHU Vs. DUKHEI SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by leave of the Court against the acquittal of the respondent of the charge under Section 406, I. P. C.

(2.) THE complainant-appellant stated that he pledged a gold necklace weighing 3 tolas consisting of 8 Tabis and one Padaka with the accused-respondent and received Rs. 100/ -. The interest was fixed at 2 pice per rupee per month. He alleged that he repaid the entire amount, namely Rs. 140-10-0 to the accused in presence of one Suresh Chandra Mohanty. That being a Thursday, it appears that the respondent refused to return the necklace and asked the appellant to come on the next day for getting the same back. He approached the respondent the next day but the latter denied any knowledge of the necklace and abused him. He reported the matter to the Village Panchayat, but to no effect.

(3.) THE accused-respondent denied the pledge as well as the payment of money. The appellant examined six witnesses. The Magistrate to whom the case was transferred did not accept the evidence on account of certain inconsistencies in the statements of the witnesses and of the appellant. The respondent examined one witness who spoke to the poverty of the appellant and also stated that the Jubakadal of the village demanded Rs. 50/-from the respondent, but the latter expressed his inability to pay the same which was alleged by the respondent to be the cause of this complaint. There is nothing in the case which would compel the setting aside of acquittal. The case rested upon the oral evidence in proof of the appellant's payment of the amount borrowed and the non-return of the pledged ornaments. The Magistrate who examined the witnesses did not accept their evidence. The appeal is misconceived and is dismissed.