1 obtained the goods from the godown of that companypany on February 26 and March 3, 1959.
1 was charged of the specific offence and the other two accused were charged with that offence read with s. 109 I.P.C. The accused were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, with the aid of a jury.
On February 24, 1959 the accused No.
1 were done in furtherance of that companymon intention.
1 was acting in furtherance of that companymon intention, all the accused would be answerable for the offences proved against accused No.
1 alone.
2 and 3 were charged under s. 467 read with s. 109 I.P.C. for having abetted accused No.
Therefore, you have first, to companysider for yourselves what offences are proved against accused No.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated June 19, 1961 of the former Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeals Nos.
The appellants would be referred to as accused No.
1 had fraudulently or dishonestly used the forged railway receipt No.
1 saying that the goods be entered in the name of accused No.
1 was charged with the offence under s. 467 I.P.C. and the other accused Nos.
It is companytended that in thus putting the case to the jury the learned Sessions Judge was in error as he did number take into companysideration the fact that accused Nos.
Six charges were framed.
As the two appeals arise from a companymon judgment, we would dispose of them by one judgment.
The learned Sessions Judge in the instant case had told the jury In case you companye to the companyclusion that there was a companymon intention in the minds of all the three accused and accused No.
1 obtained the delivery sheet of the bill and signed it in the name of Shri Datta.
This wagon reached Wadi Bunder on February 16, 1959.
He also obtained delivery of the iron angles from the railway and signed the Railway Delivery Book in the name of Shri Datta.
Mohan Kumarmangalam, R. K. Garg and M. K. Ramamurthi, for the appellant in Cr.
1 in the companymission of that offence.
1 regarding substantive offences and against accused Nos.
3 and also companytained a further entry indicating the goods to be received in the account of accused No.
2 and 3 with respect to the various offences read with s. 109 I.P.C. The Sessions Judge accepted the verdict of the jury and companyvicted them of the various offences read with s. 34 I.P.C. Their appeals to the High Court were unsuccessful and therefore accused Nos.
The second charge was framed in the alternative.
A companyplaint by the original companysignee about the numberreceipt of the iron angles sent from Gobind Garh led to an enquiry and eventual prosecution of the three accused.
The jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against all the accused for the various offences read with s. 34 I.P.C. The verdict of the jury was number recorded with respect to the five alternative charges against accused No.
43352 and on payment of the charges amounting to Rs.
3 and accused No.
2 and 3 have preferred these appeals after obtaining special leave from this Court.
218 and 242 of 1961 respectively.
The railway authorities delivered these on the presentation of the forged receipt No.
Charges Nos.
On February 18, accused No.
1,500/ .
3 had necessar to obtain a letter signed by Pyare Lal when the goods has number been shown to be stored in his account but were number in the account of Pyare Lal or of both Sheopershad Bin Kumar and Pyare Lal.
150 of 1961 was accused No.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAGHUBAR DAYAL J. Shiv Prasad Chunilal Jain, appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
2 respectively.
1 by virtue of s. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
You have next to ask yourselves whether it is proved and it can also be proved by circumstantial evidence that there was a companymon intention in the minds of all the three accused and the acts done by accused No.
150/61 .
The latter entry was made on the receipt of a chit, Exhibit Z8, from accused No.
On February 17 it was unloaded by Baburao Gawade, P.W.I and Shridhar, P.W. 14.
The entries in the book showed their receipt in the account of accused No.
43352 dated February 6, 1959.
These iron angles were then transported to the godown of the National Transport Company at Sewri and stored there.
A. No.
A. No.
1 at the trial.
1 by virtue of the provisions of s. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and it would be numberanswer to the charge to say that the acts were done by accused No.
597481, They were despatched in an open wagon bearing E.R. No.
185 of 1961 was accused No.
185 of 1961 .
2, at the Sessions Trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay.
Accused No.
If your answer is yes all the three accused would be guilty of the charges proved against accused No.
K. Khanna, B. R. G. K. Achar and R. H. Dhebar, for the respondent in both the appeals .
Along with them was a third accused, Rameshwarnath Brijmohan Shukla who was accused No.
The facts leading to the companyviction of the appellants are that a large quantity of iron angles was companysigned early in February 1959 from Gobind Garh to Raypuram under railway receipt No.
150 and 185 of 1961.
The labels of the wagon were changed at Itarsi railway station and it was diverted to Wadi Bunder under a label showing that the iron angles had been despatched from Baran to Wadi Bunder under railway receipt No.
M. Mistry, Ravinder Narain and J. B. Dadachanji, for the appellant in Cr.
69667.
The direction given by him in Exhibit Z 8 was Please give a receipt in the name of a c Pyare Lal.
3 and Pyarelal Ishwardas Kapoor, appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
February 26, 1964.
3 to 6 were similarly framed in the alternative, i.e., in the first instance all the three accused were charged with certain offences read with s. 34 P.C. while in the alternative accused No.
43352.
It is significant that accused No.
2 and 3 were number present at all at the time when the various offences were actually companymitted by accused No.
2 signed an application, Exhibit K, addressed to the head office of the National Transport Company for delivering the goods.
