Skip to content


Bheemappa Bhemappa Korawar and anr. Vs. State of Mysore - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1971CriLJ125
AppellantBheemappa Bhemappa Korawar and anr.
RespondentState of Mysore
Excerpt:
.....get more compensation that his signatures were obtained forcibly on agreement is not inspiring confidence of court and is not tenable. - that being so and since the ingredients of an offence punishable under section 414 are not the ingredients of an offence punishable under section 380 or 457 of the penal code, and since there can be no conviction under section 414 of the penal code unless the accused voluntarily assist the concealment or disposal of property which they knew or had reason to believe to be stolen property, and the petitioners in the present case bad no opportunity to meet any such charge......c.j.1. the accused were charged with only two offences punishable under 8s. 457 and 380 of the penal code, but, there was no conviction with respect to any of those offences and instead there was a conviction in respect of an offence punishable under section 414 of the penal code. that offence is committed only if a person assists in concealing or disposing the property which he knew or had reason to believe to be stolen property.2. although, the chargesheet stated that an offence under section 414 of the penal code had also been committed by the accused, the magistrate framed no charge with respect to that offence. that being so and since the ingredients of an offence punishable under section 414 are not the ingredients of an offence punishable under section 380 or 457 of the penal.....
Judgment:
ORDER

A.R. Somnath Iyer, C.J.

1. The accused were charged with only two offences punishable under 8s. 457 and 380 of the Penal Code, but, there was no conviction with respect to any of those offences and instead there was a conviction in respect of an offence punishable Under Section 414 of the Penal Code. That offence is committed only if a person assists in concealing or disposing the property which he knew or had reason to believe to be stolen property.

2. Although, the chargesheet stated that an offence Under Section 414 of the Penal code had also been committed by the accused, the Magistrate framed no charge with respect to that offence. That being so and since the ingredients of an offence punishable Under Section 414 are not the ingredients of an offence punishable Under Section 380 or 457 of the Penal Code, and since there can be no conviction Under Section 414 of the Penal Code unless the accused voluntarily assist the concealment or disposal of property which they knew or had reason to believe to be stolen property, and the petitioners in the present case bad no opportunity to meet any such charge. I allow this revision petition and get aside the conviction of the petitioners and the sentence imposed on them.

3. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //