Consequent upon the above finding, the High Court set aside the companyvictions of respondents 1 2 under Section 411, I.P.C. and directed Exhs.
1 and 3 should be delivered to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzzafarnagar for disposal according to law, thereby setting aside the order of the Magistrate directing the parties to go to the Civil Court.
The revision for enhancement of sentence, filed by the companyplainant was dismissed.
After companypleting the investigation, he filed the charge sheet.
222 and 227 of 1975 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzzafarnagar.
Coming to the disposal of the property, the Trial Court directed Exhs.
1 3 to be restored to respondents 1 and 2 respectively on the ground that these two items of properties were recovered from their houses.
243/75 questioning the jurisdiction of the Magistrate in directing the parties to approach the Civil Court to lay their respective claims in respect of other items of properties other than Exhibits 1 3.
1210, 1428 of 1976 whereas the companyplainant filed Criminal Revision No.
During the hearing of this appeal, both the learned Counsel have admitted that the matter in respect of the disposal of the other articles as per the order of the learned Sessions Judge made in Criminal Appeal No.
1 3 to be returned to the companyplainant and left the parties to go to the Civil Court to lay their claim in respect of the other items of properties.
1 and 3 to the effect that all other items of properties except Exhs.
The companyplainant, also preferred Criminal Appeal No.
As pointed out earlier, the High Court has summarily disposed of the.
1 3 had been stolen from the companyplainants house on the intervening night of 25/26 2 1968.
The Trial Court found respondents 1 2 guilty of the offence punishable Under Section 411 I.P.C. in respect of Exhibits 1 3 and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years.
As we are number satisfied with the reasoning of the High Court with regard to the disposal of the properties Exhs.
The Investigating Officer was able to recover some of the items of the properties from the houses of respondents 1 2 on 24 3 1968.
1,4, 5 7 had already seen the Gold Chain Tagri Exhs.
1 3 to respondents 1 and but maintain the order of acquittal passed by the High Court of these two respondents and direct that the properties Exh.
1474 of 1976 for enhancement of sentence.
Respondents 1 2 preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.
As against the judgment of the Appellate Court, respondents 1 and 2 preferred Criminal Revision Nos.
In the result, we set aside the order of the High Court directing the delivery of the properties Exh.
243/75 filed by the companyplainant is still pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzzafarnagar.
The appellant who is the companyplainant in this criminal proceeding has filed this appeal on being aggrieved by the companymon judgment made in Criminal Revisions Nos.
revision and directed the properties to be restored to respondents 1 and 2.
On the representation made by the companynsel for the companyplainant, the High Court observed.
The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the two appeals preferred by the respondents 1 and 2 but modified the sentence of imprisonment to one of fine and allowed the Criminal Appeal preferred by the companyplainant and modified the order of the Magistrate in respect of the properties other than Exhs.
1 3 before they were put for identification on 2 7 1968 and, therefore, the fact that the said witnesses identified the two articles at the test identification was of numberconsequence and, therefore, the mere fact that they identified those two articles in Court when they were number mixed up with other similar articles companyld number be safely relied upon to record the companyviction of respondents 1 and 2 Under Section 411 I.P.C. The High companyrt has mainly companysidered only the discrepancy that has crept in with regard to the dates of identification of these two articles and companycluded a perusal thereof showed that the property was number put for identification on 14 6 68 because it has grown too late.
1210, 1428 and 1474 of 1976 on the file of the High Court of Allahabad.
The brief facts which have given rise to this appeal are as follows On the intervening night of 25/26th Feb. 1968 there was a burglary in the house of the companyplainant in respect of which he laid a report before the police as against respondents 1 and 2 and two other accused who died during the pdendency of the trial.
1 and 3 along with other articles, uninfluenced by the findings of any of the Courts with regard to the claim of the properties by the parties companycerned.3 shall be sent to the C.J.M., Muzzafarnagar who thereupon will make a thorough enquiry by giving sufficient opportunity to both the parties and pass appropriate orders according to law in respect of the properties Exhs.
Feeling aggrieved, the companyplainant has filed this present appeal.
