Skip to content


Mohan Lal Vs. State of Maharashtra - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 206 of 1972
Judge
Reported inAIR1979SC1718; 1979CriLJ1328; (1979)4SCC751; 1979(11)LC526(SC)
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 411
AppellantMohan Lal
RespondentState of Maharashtra
Excerpt:
.....to show that empty bags recovered from shop of appellant were bags that had been brought from godown of engineering college from where they were stolen - prosecution failed to prove that appellant was in possession of property which he had reason to believe that it was stolen property - mere presence of appellant in shop where goods were delivered did not itself prove essential ingredients for offence under section 411 - appellant acquitted. - labour & services promotion: [tarun chatterjee & v.s. sirpurkar,jj] arrears of pay for period during which promotion denied due to pending criminal prosecution and departmental proceedings - office memorandum promoting him providing that no arrears to be paid for the period he had not actually worked legality - held, employer has a right..........from the shop to the appellant were the very bags that had been brought from the godown of the engineering college from where they were stolen. dr. chitale for the state, however, submitted that though the bags had no special mark of identification but prosecution proved by direct evidence of the certman and the driver of the truck that the bags were brought from the godown of the engineering college to the shop of the appellant. but that, however, does not solve the problem because the prosecution has still to prove that the appellant was in possession of property which he had reason to believe (hat it was stolen property. on this point there is absolutely no evidence, nor is there anything to show that the appellant himself had got the empty bags from the engineering college or.....
Judgment:

S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.

1. In this appeal by special leave, the appellant has been convicted under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months R.I. and fine of Rs. 1000/-. The only ground on which special leave appears to have been granted, in this case was that there was absolutely no evidence to show that the appellant had the knowledge or reason to believe that the bage recovered from his godown were stolen property. The facts of the case have been fully detailed in the judgment of the Sessions Judge as the High Court summarily dismissed the appeal. Mr. V.S. Desai, Senior Counsel, appearing in support of she appeal submitted that there was no evidence to show that the empty bags recovered from the shop to the appellant were the very bags that had been brought from the godown of the Engineering College from where they were stolen. Dr. Chitale for the State, however, submitted that though the bags had no special mark of identification but prosecution proved by direct evidence of the certman and the driver of the truck that the bags were brought from the godown of the Engineering college to the shop of the appellant. But that, however, does not solve the problem because the prosecution has still to prove that the appellant was in possession of property which he had reason to believe (hat it was stolen property. On this point there is absolutely no evidence, nor is there anything to show that the appellant himself had got the empty bags from the Engineering College or that he made payment to the driver of the truck. Payment according to the prosecution was made by accused No. 4. The only fact that has been proved is that the shop was run by accused No. 4 and 5 and the appellant was only a partner in the business carried on in his shop. The mere presence of the appellant in the shop where the goods were delivered does not itself prove the essential ingredients for an offence under Section 411 IPC. The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the appellant is acquitted of the charges framed against him. The appellant will now be discharged from his bail bords. Fine if paid must be refunded.


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