STATE Vs. MITHALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are six connected appeals by the State against the acquittal of Mithalal accused by a First Class Magistrate. As the main point involved in all these appeals is the same, we propose to dispose of them by one judgment.

(2.) The case for the prosecution may be briefly stated. Mithalal is a goldsmith and carries on the work of preparing ornaments in Jodhpur. The six complainants in these six cases either gave gold only or gold as well as, cash or cash only to Mithalal for the purpose of preparing ornaments. The case of these six complainants was that Mithalal misappropriated the gold or cash given to him and disappeared from Jodhpur. Consequently, they reported the matter to the police and Mithalal was prosecuted under Section 406, Penal Code.

(3.) The Magistrate took evidence and framed a charge against Mithalal under Section 406, Penal Code. But after the case was' over, he did not decide questions of facts raided in these cases and acquitted the accused on the on the ground that there had been no entrustment to him as required by Section 405 Penal Code. He relied on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in -- 'Kanai Lal v. The State', AIR 1951 Cal 206 (A). The State Government has come up in appeal and it is contended by the learned Deputy Government Advocate that the Magistrate was wrong in acquitting the accused on the basis of Kanai Lal Dutta's case (A)