RAMDEYAL PRASAD Vs. SAYED HASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition on behalf of one Ramdeyal Prasad Sonar who has been convicted under Section 406, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to two months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200 in default two weeks rigorous imprisonment. The appellate Court has upheld the conviction and sentence but has modified the amount of compensation awarded to the complainant, from Rs. 50 to Rs. 150 out of the fine, if realised. The case for the prosecution is that the complainant had pawned nine gold ornaments between July a December, 1941, with the petitioner and that when he went to demand back the ornaments on 2nd October 1942, the petitioner said that he had melted away the ornaments and therefore could not return them.

(2.) A complaint was then filed on 6 October 1942 and the petitioner was summoned for 22 October, 1942. It appears that the complainant used to pawn ornaments with the petitioner from time to time. Exhibit D, dated 17 October 1939, refers to a gold bali pawned for Rs. 20; there is no time limit mentioned in it. Exhibit E, dated 19 November 1939, refers to a gold bali for Rs. 20 in which also there is no time limit mentioned. Exhibit C, dated 31 December 1940, refers to a gold jugnu for Rs. 50 in which also no time limit is mentioned. Then Ex. B is a loan of Rs. 10 taken on 30 March 1941.

(3.) It may be noted that these exhibits show that no time limit was fixed as to the redemption of the articles pawned. It also appears that the petitioner served a registered notice faux. G) on the opposite party on 29 July 1942, through a pleader, and. Ex. A is the postal acknowledgment which is admitted to be signed by the complainant. By the notice the petitioner demanded that the pawned articles must be redeemed by 15 August 1942, but this was not done. The complainant's case is that property worth Rs. 131 was actually pawned with the petitioner, and that after the notice served on him he went to the house of the petitioner several times, until on 2 October, 1942, he was informed that the ornaments had been melted away. The complainant further alleged that the ornaments were pawned for three years and $ as the petitioner had misappropriated them before the expiry of the period, his action amounted to a breach of trust under Section 406, Indian Penal Code.