VINOD MALI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition challenge has been made to the judgment dtd. 27/6/2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 4, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal appeal No. 22/2023, whereby the learned Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 10/1/2023 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 3, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Regular Case No. 601/2009; whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Ss. 457 and 380 of the IPC and for each count he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 3 years alongwith a fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default sentence of 1 month's simple imprisonment.

(2.) Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that on 15/9/2009, complainant Pankaj Soni submitted a written report at the Police Station Mahamandir to the effect that his jewelry shop is situated behind Bhadwasiya School, in front of cold storage, at RTO Road. In the night of 14/9/2009 between 1.00 a.m. and 3.00 a.m. someone broke the shutter of his shop, broke the glass and stole gold and silver ornaments worth Rs.2,97,000.00. On the basis of the aforesaid report, FIR No. 340/2009 was registered at the Police Station Mahamandir, Jodhpur for the offences under Ss. 457 and 380 of the IPC. After usual investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner for the offences under Ss. 457 and 380 of the IPC.

(3.) The Learned Magistrate framed charges against the petitioner for the above offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in order to prove the offences, examined as many as 8 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. The accused, upon being confronted with the prosecution allegations, in his statement under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., denied the allegations and claimed to be innocent. No evidence was adduced from defence side. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned Trial Court convicted the accused for offences under Ss. 457 and 380 of the IPC vide judgment dtd. 10/1/2023. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, he preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dtd. 27/6/2023 affirming the judgment passed by the Trial Court. Hence, this revision petition is filed before this Court.