- (1.) THE instant revision has been filed against concurrent findings of the Courts below convicting the petitioners for offence under Section 382 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial Court awarded them the sentence to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ - each; in default of payment of fine to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for 02 days. The appeal filed by the petitioners against the judgement of conviction and sentence was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that on 25.8.2007 Gurwant Kaur complainant and her son were returning from Majitha on a motorcycle at about 6.30 p.m. Then two youths hit their motorcycle with the motor bike of the complainant and threw them on the ground. The culprits threatened the complainant with knives to hand over her ear rings. The complainant handed over her ear rings to the accused persons. The petitioners were named in the FIR on an information of an occupant of the mini bus which came towards that place.
(3.) THE complainant appeared in the witness box and identified the petitioners to be culprits. Her statement is corroborated from the evidence of recovery of ear rings from the possession of petitioners thus clinching the matter against the petitioners. The learned Appellate Court observed as under: - "Recovery of stolen articles i.e. ear rings belonging to the complainant was recovered from the possession of accused as proved by SI Deva Singh PW3 and recovery witness C. Baldev Singh PW4. Both of them have stated that on the basis of disclosure statement of accused Major Singh, ear rings were recovered from his possession vide recovery memo Ex.P -8. The weapons i.e. daggers Ex.P -15 and Ex.P -16 used by the accused in the commission of the offence were also recovered from the possession of the accused on the basis of their disclosure statements vide recovery memo Ex.P -9 and Ex.P10 as proved by SI Deva Singh PW -3 and C. Baldev Singh PW -4. Ear rings Ex.P -1 and Ex. P -2 recovered from the possession of accused were identified by complainant Gurwant Kaur during trial at the time of recording her statement. SI Deva Singh, Investigating Officer also stated in his statement on oath that ear rings Ex.P -1 and Ex.P -2 produced in the Court were recovered from the possession of the accused. According to Section 114 Illustration (a) of Indian Evidence Act, court may presume that a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen unless he can account for his possession. Thus, as per the above said presumption, recovery of stolen goods i.e. ear rings belonging to complainant Gurwant Kaur from the possession of accused on 28.8.2007 i.e. soon after the theft committed on 25.8.2007 it has been proved that it is the accused who have committed theft as accused could not account of their possession. Accused Major Singh from whom recovery of ear rings was effected stated in his disclosure statement Ex.P -7 that he and Satnam Singh committed theft of said ear rings on 25.8.2007 near village Jhanderan by means of daggers. Thus, confession statement of accused Major Singh can be taken into consideration against accused Satnam Singh who has tried alongwith the accused Major Singh in this case for the same offence as per Section 30 of Indian Evidence Act.";