Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: stolen goods Page 1 of about 8,727 results (0.018 seconds)

Emperor Vs. Chavadappa Pujari

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1945Bom292; (1945)47BOMLR63

..... point of view, ill. (a) to section 114 of the indian evidence act is intended to meet one specific set of facts,- simple theft and possession of stolen goods soon after the theft,- and it indicates what presumption may legitimately be drawn from these two facts under section 114. if the principle of this illustration is to be ..... consider when and in what manner the presumption would arise.4. the condition precedent for the application of the illustration is that the accused must be in possession of stolen goods. where they are on the person of the accused, as is the case with accused no. 11, or in the houses or fields exclusively occupied by them, ..... fact of such possession under ill. (a) to section 114 of the evidence act. that illustration describes a person in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft as a thief or a receiver of stolen property unless he accounts for his possession. the illustration is not exhaustive but only indicative of the general principle embodied in the section .....

Sadasiv Das and ors. Vs. State

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1958Ori51; 1958CriLJ534

..... counsel have application. but when the judgment is clearly to the effect that the court has drawn such a presumption on account of the possession of the accused of stolen goods soon after the theft, then on the strength of those decisions it cannot be contended that the conviction is bad.in the present appeal before us it is ..... which did not even belong to the appellant was not sufficient to bring the guilt home to the appellant or to prove that he was in possession of the stolen goods; and that the evidence as regards his participation in the dacoity was disbelieved. on appeal by the state government, the high court agreed with the finding of the ..... to draw the presumption under section 114 of the evi. act and the court draws that presumption that a person in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft, has received the goods knowing them to be stolen if he cannot account for his possession, then the matter is quite different. the substantive law is contained in sections 411 and 412 .....

Pershadi Vs. the State

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1955All443; 1955CriLJ1125

..... more, probable and. natural as the true explanation of the originally offered evidentiary fact' (paragraph 34, page 423). when a person is found in recent possession of stolen goods, several hypotheses can explain the fact of his possession;'nevertheless the hypothesis that he was the taker is a sufficiently natural one to allow the fact of his possession ..... the theft, and this is a sound law; if the theft and the murder are both committed in one transaction and a person found in possession of the stolen goods soon after the theft can be presumed to have committed it, there is no reason why he should not be presumed to have committed the murder as well ..... however penal, including the charge of murder. the same law is stated by greenleaf on evidence, vol. 1, paragraph 34.according to kenny, the possessor of goods recently stolen may fairly be regarded as either the actual thief or else a guilty receiver and that 'his possession raises also--but less strongly--a presumption of his guilty .....

In Re: Kallam Narayana

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1933)64MLJ88

..... presumptions in criminal cases which are provided for in section 114 of the indian evidence act arise not only in connection with cases of theft and receipt of stolen goods but also in connection with other offences. i have thought it necessary to make these observations which are entirely in agreement with those which have fallen from my ..... it is a matter of common procedure to utilise evidence of this kind and the presumption such as this in connection not only with theft and the receipt of stolen goods but with more aggravated offences. i propose to refer to two cases only. one of which deals very clearly with the presumption in the case of the offence ..... 1915) 84 l.j.k.b. 396. the appellants there were charged with the offence of receiving stolen goods well knowing the same to have been stolen. the evidence for the prosecution established that the appellants were in possession of goods recently stolen and the judge in directing the jury said:it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the .....

Bikash Das Vs. State of Tripura

Court : Guwahati

..... family could identify any of the dacoits because they covered their faces by black cloth. however, evidence adduced by the prosecution has established that some of the stolen goods were found from the possession of the accused which is directly connected with the dacoity committed in the informant's house. it is therefore, legitimate to apply ..... under the provisions of section 114 with the aid of illustration (a) of the evidence act, because the accused appellant could not account for possession of the stolen goods in his house. in the case of shivappa (supra) it was held by the apex court:if there is other evidence to connect an accused with the ..... rs. 1000/- only in default to suffer st for one month.7. shri d. guha learned counsel for the appellant, strenuously argued that the recovery of stolen goods from the possession of the accused appellant could not be proved/established inasmuch as the incriminating articles were allegedly recovered and seized from the dwelling hut of the accused .....

Sheonath Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1970SC535; 1970CriLJ601; (1969)3SCC116; [1970]2SCR796

..... to believe that the property had been transferred by the commission of dacoity. the prosecution, in our opinion, has to show something more than the mere possession of stolen goods for a conviction under section 412. if the prosecution is only able to show mere possession, the proper section to use is 411.8. in the result ..... occurrence of the dacoity :(1) that the appellant took part in the dacoity;(2) that he received stolen goods knowing that the goods were stolen in the commission of a dacoity; and(3) that the appellant received these goods knowing them to have been stolen.the choice to be made, however, must depend on the facts proved in this case. it ..... relation to facts of the particular case. illustrations.the court may presume-(a) that a man who is in possession of stolen goods after the theft, is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession.this section was considered by this court in sanwal khan v. state of rajasthan .....

Ayodhya Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1972SC2501; 1972CriLJ1696; (1972)3SCC885; [1973]1SCR880; 1973(5)LC346(SC); 1972()WLN609

..... should draw the presumption that a person found in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft and who has not been able to account for his possession is the thief or whether he is the receiver of the ..... . according to illustration (a) of section 114 of the indian evidence act, a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession. it would, in our opinion, depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether the court ..... the appellant was found soon after the theft in possession of a very large number of stolen articles shows that he was himself the thief and not the receiver of stolen goods. the present is not a case wherein one or two or a very few of the stolen articles were found in the possession of the appellant soon after the theft. on the .....

Chandra Pal and ors. Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1954All684

..... suggestion as to what that possible evidence could be. it is well nigh impossible for the prosecution to prove the knowledge of a person found in possession of stolen goods. a presumption has therefore to be raised and if the scope of the presumption mentioned in section 114 illustration (a) of the evidence act is limited ..... it would be open to the accused to rebut the presumption by accounting for his innocent possession or by establishing circumstances raising a reasonable doubt. but once stolen property is recovered from the possession of a person under circumstances mentioned in illustration (a) of section 114 of the evidence act, the presumption of the knowledge ..... . on the basis of the recoveries mentioned above, ram swarup and bhola were found guilty under section 412 of the penal code and were convicted. no stolen property was recovered from the possession of the ether appellants, but the evidence produced against them comprised of witnesses who had identified them at the time of the .....

In Re: B.N. Ramakrishna Naidu and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1955Mad100; 1955CriLJ452

..... get found out. such an oragnlsatlon does not exist and if one is brought into existence these criminals are bound to quarrel and 'truth will out. the habitual receivers of stolen goods in madras are very well acquainted with law and it would be difficult to secure a conviction. but, notwithstanding their cleverness let a court of law be called upon to ..... the pilferers who are too numerous in the city and even though the receivers of stolen properties had at the time of. the pledge of such articles grave suspicions about the ownership of the pledger to the pawned goods they acquiesce in them, and thus indirectly are responsible for such thefts. in other words, by readily advancing monies to persons whom they .....

Ram Bharosey Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All481

..... the broker does not get custody or control of that property but he takes steps to bring the thief into contact with the person who will ultimately receive the stolen goods. such a person would be guilty under section 414. penal code. section 414 clearly applies, as its language shows, to persons who voluntarily assist in the selling ..... in the disposal of stolen property. when all these persons are punished then, it may be said that all ..... where a person receives and even disposes of the stolen property merely on his own account. the object of section 414 clearly is to punish a person who assists in the traffic of stolen goods section 379. penal code, punishes a thief section 411, punishes a receiver of stolen property and section 414 punishes a person who assists .....