DULHE SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above revision petitions may be disposed of jointly as they arise from one Criminal Case F.I.R. No. 7/78, registered at Police Station, Gangadhar, district Jhalawar. Revision Petition No. 272/94 has been filed by the accused Dulhe Singh and Nathu Singh, while revision petition No. 308/94 has been filed by Chain Singh. All the three accused were prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. in the court of Additional Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Bhawani Mandi alongwith one Chandra Singh. However, Chandra Singh died during the course of trial. The learned trial Magistrate after completion of the trial convicted and sentence all the three accused petitioners under sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00 under each count. In default of payment of fine, they were to undergo further imprisonment for six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The facts need not be narrated in detail as the learned counsel restricted his submissions on two counts. The first submission is that the conviction of the petitioners under section-457 I.P.C. is not sustainable. The second submission is that the petitioners have been facing trial since 1978 and 16 years have passed since then, as such, the sentence already undergone by them will meet the ends of justice.

(3.) In brief, the facts are that in the night intervening 14th and 15th Jan. 1978, theft of golden and silver ornaments and clothes was committed in the house of the informant Chandra Singh (P.W.2). A report of the incident was made on 15.1.78 at the Police Station where crime was registered under sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. The accused-petitioners were arrested after 7 months or so of the incident and on their information under section-27 of the Evidence Act, the ornaments and other articles were recovered. The articles and ornaments have been identified by P.W.2, Chandra Singh, P.W.3, Bhanwar Bai and P.W.4, Smt. Bhagwan Bai. The learned trial court after recording the evidence relied on the prosecution evidence and convicted the petitioners as stated earlier, vide judgment dated, 14.10.87. The appeal preferred by them was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar vide his judgment dated 30.6.1994.