PHUL CHAND DUBE Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Phul Chand Dube has been convicted by a Magistrate of the first class under Section 411, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. He appealed and the conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge of Ghazipur. Phul Chand Dube comes up before this Court with an application for revision and challenges the propriety of the conviction and sentence.

(2.) The facts of the case lie within a very narrow compass and may be briefly outlined here. One Sahodar Patakh of the district of Chapra owned a bullock. His bullock was missing. This bullock, after several months, was traced in the possession of Phul Chand Dube, the applicant. The bullock was taken possession of by the police and Phul Chand Dube was prosecuted under Section 411. I.P.C., with the result which has been indicated above.

(3.) The learned Magistrate and the learned Additional Sessions Judge do not appear to have approached the case from the proper angle and I am not surprised that they have failed to view the matter in its true perspective. In order to bring home the guilt under Section 411, I.P.C., it is essential that some stolen property should have been found in the possession of the accused and there should have been evidence that the accused retained possession of the property either knowingly or having reason to believe that the same was stolen property.