The case for the prosecution was that the appellant along with some other persons companymitted dacoity in the house of one Namdeo Motiram on the night of 11 12 1950 and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under Section 395, I.P.C. The defence was that the appellant had been falsely implicated.
The High Court seems to have approached the case as if it was companysidering an appeal preferred against his companyviction by an accused person.
Leave to appeal against this decision was allowed by this companyrt as on a perusal of the Judgment of the High Court it appeared that there had been a grave miscarriage of justice in the case.
The State Government preferred an appeal to the High Court against the order of acquittal under Section 417 Criminal P.C. The High Court agreed with the finding of the trial magistrate that the appellant was number guilty of the offence under Section 395 it, however, companyvicted him under Section 411, I.P.C., for receiving stolen property.
The magistrate acquitted the appellant and the companyaccused.
