The articles were number listed at the spot but were taken to the Kotwali in a sealed packet and later on listed there.
At the time of the search the appellant who happens to be a trade union official, was number in Bulandshahr but was away on leave at Delhi in companynection with a postal companyference.
Briefly, the appellants defence in all these cases is that there are two factions in the Bulandshahr post office and that these articles were planted by the opposite party.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 20, 1960 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Government Appeals Nos.
The appellant has companye up to this Court by special leave.
Briefly stated the prosecution case is that when the house in which the appellant lives along with his father Diwan Singh, a retired Police Head Constable, was searched by the I.D. Inspector, S.N. Singh, along with Masood Murtaza, Sub Inspector of Police, Bulandshahr on May 12, 1956, in companynection with a case against Messrs Greenwood Publicity, they accidentally discovered a large number of letters and postcards and also the five registered letters in question.
A number of other articles were also seized at that time but we are number companycerned with them as they have numberconnection with the charges against the appellant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos.
The High Court held that the appellant had secreted the five registered letters in question and on this finding set aside his acquittal and companyvicted him in each of the three appeals for offences under s. 52 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year in each case.
These articles were found in an almirah, the key of which was produced by the appellants father.
C. Misra and P. K. Chakravarti, for the appellant.
In all these trials, the appellant, who was a postman attached to the Bulandshahr post office was tried for offences under s. 52 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 VI of 1898 and in two of them, also for offences under ss.
C. Mathur and C. P. Lal, for the respondent.
467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
The State then preferred an appeal against his acquittal in these three cases to the High Court of Allahabad but restricted the appeal to the acquittal of the appellant in respect of offences under s. 52 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 hereafter referred to as the Act .
160 to 162 of 1960.
2011 to 2013 of 1958.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by MUDHOLKAR, J. These three appeals arise out of three separate trials before the Additional Sessions judge, Bulandshahr, but were argued together as they arise identical questions.
The learned Additional Sessions judge acquitted the appellant of all these offences.
September 27.
Briefly stated the allegations against the appellant were that he either stole or secreted five registered letters and that he fabricated three receipts showing that the registered letters were received by the addressees.
