OKHA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution case as disclosed at the trial is that, on the night of Srawan Sudi 4, Samwat 2031 the two accused Okha and Tagga stealthily came to the 'Bada' of PW 5 Karmi and committed a theft of an ox. In the way they were seen by PW 4 Ramji and PW 11 Bhurdan, taking away the ox belonging to PW 5 Karmi. First information report of this occurrence was lodged at the Police Station, Guda Malani on Aug. 10, 1973. During the course of investigation it was revealed that the accused had sold the stolen ox to PW 6 Chatra for an amount of Rs. 900.00 PW 6 Chatra produced a receipt Ex. D. 1. The Police after usual investigation submitted a challan against both the accused under Sec. 379, IPC. in the Court of Munsiff-Magistrate, Barmer. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge.

(2.) The prosecution in support of their case examined 15 witnesses. The accused persons denied their complicity in the crime. They did not examine any witness in their defence, Placing reliance on the statements of PW 4 Ramji, PW 11 Bhurdan, PW 6 Chatra and PW 5 Karmi the learned Magistrate held the accused guilty of the charge framed against them. He convicted both the accused under section 379, IPC, and sentenced each of them to one years rigorous imprisonment by his order dated Nov. 12, 1975. The aggrieved accused took up an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, who after reappraisal of the evidence affirmed the judgment of the trial court by his order dated Oct. 7, 1976, Against that order accused Okha alone has come up in revision.

(3.) The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the accused-petitioner, has urged that the statement of PW 6 Chatra cannot be held sufficient for holding that the accused sold the ox belonging to PW 5 Karmi to him. I find no force in this contention. The statement of PW 6 Chatra stands corroborated by Ex. D. 1, which is a receipt for selling the ox to PW 6 Chatra by the accused persons. PW 5 Karmi has identified the ox as one belonging to him and he has further stated that this is the same ox which was stolen from his 'Bada', on Srawan Sudi 4, S. 2031. The two courts below have placed reliance on the statements of the prosecution witnesses and have held the accused guilty of the offence charged against him. I find no reason to take a different view.