STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Vs. ABDUL REHMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :- This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by Sessions Judge, Bhaderwah dated 23-5-80. By means of impugned judgment, respondents who were tried and found guilty and then having been convicted for offences under Sections 380/411 of the RPC and were sentenced under Section 380 to one year rigorous imprisonment and also to pay fine of Rs. 200/- each, in default of payment whereof, they were required to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months each. In appeal both the respondents have been acquitted by the appellate Court below.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this case are that a complaint was lodged by Mahant Baba Sat Narayan PW 1 on the allegations that a theft had taken place from a locked room of the Dhram Shala while Mahant Baba Sat Narayan had gone to Tirath Yatra (pilgrimage). This complaint was made at Police Station, Bhaderwah on 10-4-71 on the basis of which came to be registered and... investigation of the case commenced. Further case of the prosecution was that during the intervening night of 22nd and 23rd of March, 1971, theft was committed by the accused and stolen property consisting utensils, blankets, a golden Chatir weighing 1/4 tola, silver Chatir weighing 6 tolas besides some pulses etc. Further case of the prosecution is that the stolen property was of the value of Rs. 453/-. During the course of investigation, Abdul Rehman stated to have made a disclosure statement on 29-4-72 which lead to recovery of the stolen property partly from his house and partly from the house of respondent 2, Juma. Disclosure made by Abdul Rehman was recorded vide EXPM which lead to subsequent recoveries of the stolen property. In the face of the statement of complainant and other witnesses namely; Baba Satharayan, Prema and Sohan Lal, the trial Court was satisfied that the prosecution has been able to bring home the guilt against the respondents and therefore it convicted them, which conviction was set aside by the appellate Court below.

(3.) In support of this appeal, learned Government Advocate forcefully urged that the appellate Court below had fallen into error while allowing the appeal and acquitting the respondents. It was further submitted by Mr. Singh that EXPM was a disclosure statement and can in no case be termed as confession having been made to Police Officer by respondent 1 while in custody. On the strength of this document, as per learned Government Advocate for the appellant, recovery effected is legal and valid and thus he prayed for upholding the judgment of trial Court by allowing the appeal.