Phakira Vs. State of Rajasthan

Phakira vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Petition allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Jan 15, 1988

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/772810

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/772810
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Navin Chandra Sharma, J.
Decided On: Jan 15, 1988
Case Number: S.B. Cr. Revision Petition No. 364 of 1987
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code - Section 379--Theft--Recovery of Cow & calves from possession of accused very much doubtful--M not supporting prosecution--Held, accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.;The recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner is rendered very much doubtful. Mohan Ram PW 6 has als...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Petition allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Phakira

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 1988(1)WLN717

Excerpt

penal code - section 379--theft--recovery of cow & calves from possession of accused very much doubtful--m not supporting prosecution--held, accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.;the recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner is rendered very much doubtful. mohan ram pw 6 has also not supported the prosecution. the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt.;revision allowed - n.c. sharma, j.1. heard. mr. l.r. choudhary for the petitioner and mr. u.c.s. singhvi, public prosecutor in this revision.2. the petitioner has been convicted under section 379, ipc by the judicial magistrate, phalodi and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. the petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction which was dismissed by the addl. sessions judge no. 1, jodhpur.3. the prosecution case is that koshlaram had lodged a report on october 26, 1978 at police station, bhojasar that on august 24, 1978, the petitioner, along with one another person had taken one cow and two calves from his dhani in the presence of his son jagdish and two others named malaram and mohanram.4. the learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner has not been established by the prosecution. ramchandra pw 4 and umaram pw 9 were the motbir witnesses of the alleged recovery. they have not supported the prosecution. kaniram pw 8 was the constable who is said to have recovered the cow and the calves. from his statement it does not appear that the cow and the calves were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. he has only stated that brother of the petitioner was found with the cow and the calves in between ghatiyali village and the dhani of the petitioner and he brought the cow and calves along with the petitioner's brother. thus, the recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner is rendered very much doubtful mohan ram pw 6 has also not supported the prosecution. the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt.5. i, therefore, allow this revision, set aside the judgment of the addl. sessions judge no. 1, jodhpur dated december 3, 1987 affirming the judgment of the judicial magistrate, phalodi dated 4-5-85 and acquit the petitioner for the offence under section 379 ipc. he is in jail. he will be released forthwith unless wanted in some other case.

Full Judgment

N.C. Sharma, J.

1. Heard. Mr. L.R. Choudhary for the petitioner and Mr. U.C.S. Singhvi, Public Prosecutor in this revision.

2. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 379, IPC by the Judicial Magistrate, Phalodi and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction which was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur.

3. The prosecution case is that Koshlaram had lodged a report on October 26, 1978 at Police Station, Bhojasar that on August 24, 1978, the petitioner, along with one another person had taken one cow and two calves from his Dhani in the presence of his son Jagdish and two others named Malaram and Mohanram.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner has not been established by the prosecution. Ramchandra PW 4 and Umaram PW 9 were the motbir witnesses of the alleged recovery. They have not supported the prosecution. Kaniram PW 8 was the constable who is said to have recovered the cow and the calves. From his statement it does not appear that the cow and the calves were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He has only stated that brother of the petitioner was found with the cow and the calves in between Ghatiyali village and the Dhani of the petitioner and he brought the cow and calves along with the petitioner's brother. Thus, the recovery of the cow and the calves from the possession of the petitioner is rendered very much doubtful Mohan Ram PW 6 has also not supported the prosecution. The petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt.

5. I, therefore, allow this revision, set aside the judgment of the Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur dated December 3, 1987 affirming the judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, Phalodi dated 4-5-85 and acquit the petitioner for the offence Under Section 379 IPC. He is in jail. He will be released forthwith unless wanted in some other case.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1988 Same Parties Phakira vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Navin Chandra Sharma, J.

Criminal