HIMMAT MAL SONI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated December, 5, 1989, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sirohi by which the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner.

(2.) ACCUSED Fatiya any Ladura were tried for offences under Sections 457 and 380 I. P. C for the theft committed at the house of non-petitioner Chunni Lal, by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Abu Road on Oct. 15, 1988. In that theft gold and silver ornaments and Rs. 900 were stolen from the house of Chunni Lal, The learned Magistrate after trial, convicted the accused Fatiya and Ladura for offences under Sections 457 and 380 I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo 2 1/2 years rigorous imprisonment to each accused and a fine of Rs. 200/- under Sec. 457 I. P. C. and two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1500/- each for the offence under sec. 380 I. P. C. The learned trial court also, ordered for the delivery of the recovered amount of Rs. 900/-as well as the gold and silver ingots and the bangles to the complainant Chunni Lal. Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, accused Fatiya preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi. An appeal was filed by accused Ladura through jail, which was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi, by his judgment dated July 9, 1986 and Ladura accused was acquitted of the offences under Section 457 and 380 I. P. C. The appeal filed by Fatiya and the appeal filed by Himmat Singh, both, were heard by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi, who, by his judgment dated September 2, 1988, allowed the appeal filed by Fatiya in part, acquitted him of the offences under Sections 457 and 380 I. P. C. but convicted him under Section 411 I. P. C. and sentenced him to undergo 2 years' rigorous imprisonment" and a fine of Rs. 2000/- The learned Sessions Judge, also allowed the appeal filed by Himmat Mal and ordered for the delivery of gold and silver ingots to Himmat Mal on some conditions. Dissatisfied with this order, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chunnilal (complainant) filed a revision-petition before this Court. That revision-petition filed by Chunnilal was allowed and the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, giving delivery of gold and silver ingots to Himmat Mal, was set-aside and the case was remanded to the learned Sessions Judge to decide the question of delivery of gold and silver ingots after taking evidence of both the parties. The learned Sessions Judge thereafter gave the opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence. After remand of the case, the complainant filed the affidavit of Fatta and also got him examined before the learned Sessions Judge. Himmat Mal examined himself in support of his case. The learned Sessions Judge after recording the statements of Fatta and Himmat Mal, by his order dated December 5, 1989, decided the question of delivery of gold and silver ingots in favour of Chunni Lal. It is against this order dated December 5, 1989 passed by the Sessions Judge Sirohi, that the present revision-petition has been filed by the petitioner Himmat Mal Soni.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY, the revision petition filed by the petitioner, has got no force and is here by dismissed. The order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Abu Road, is restored. .