JAGANNATH SAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has arisen against the appellate order and judgment dated 21-5-87 passed in CA. No. 22(S-2) of 1986 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sonitpur upholding conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 411, IPC by judgment dated 4-6-86 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tezpur holding the petitioner guilty under Section 411, IPC awarding sentence to undergo RI for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00, in default 1 month's RI in CR case No. 1023/82

(2.) Joseph Munda, one of the accused was arrested in connection with Rangapara Police Station chargesheet No. 100 dated 6-6-82. He confessed his guilt of having stolen ornaments of gold and silver from the house of one Prabhat Saikia implicating the petitioner that he sold the stolen articles to the petitioner. The said Joseph Munda led the investigating agency to the petitioner's house and upon house search pieces of melted gold and silver weighing 1 tola 15 annas and 1 anna 5 rattis respectively were found in a small tin box and the same were seized. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that there was nothing to connect the petitioner or the melted gold and silver in his possession either as an accused in the case or as articles stolen from the house of the informant except the confessional statement of the said Joseph Munda. The said Joseph Munda also absconded during the investigation who said at the time of confessing the guilty that he sold some ornaments of gold and silver to the petitioner.

(3.) The evidence of prosecution on trial was complete as back as on 13-5-85 and statement of the petitioner as accused u/S. 313, Cr. P.C. was recorded immediately thereon and the case was posted for judgment after hearing submissions of both sides. But after almost about a year thereof i.e., on 24-5-86 prosecution witness No. 4 Shri Keshab Deka, the investigating officer was brought before the court upon a warrant of arrest. He was re-examined to state that he was led by the absconding accused Joseph Munda to the house of the petitioner and that the articles seized from the house of the petitioner happened to be the articles stolen in different from and the court proceeded under Section 311, Cr. P.C. without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. The said witness No. 4 was examined. The petitioner was deprived to explain the incriminating circumstances disclosed upon the re-examination of the PW 4 and without further examining the petitioner under Section 313 Cr. P.C. the learned trial Magistrate heard argument for second time on 29-5-86 and rendered judgment on 4-6-86 convicting and sentencing the petitioner to undergo and serve sentence as aforesaid. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred appeal before the Sessions Judge and being transferred the case to the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge the learned Addl. Sessions Judge heard and decided the appeal upholding and affirming the conviction and sentence as aforesaid.