High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Criminal Revision No.1040 of 2017. The revision challenging acquittal against theft charges was disposed of at the motion stage without addressing merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No.1040 of 2017
---- Revisioner/Applicant
Versus
1. Yashawant Koshle S/o Sukh Chand Koshle, Aged About 30 Years
2. Bham Chand S/o Rajwa Dritlahre, Aged About 36 Years R/o V. Munarbod P.S. Bemetara Chhattisgarh
3. Nirmal @ Bhuru Markandey, S/o Roop Lal Markandey Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Surki, P. S. Darhi
4. Teku Markandey, S/o Dhan Singh Markandey R/o Village Surki, P. S. Darhi
5. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Darhi, Distt. Bemetara Chhattisgarh
---- Non Revisioners/Respondents
For Revisioner/applicant : Shri Kishan Lal Sahu, Advocate For respondent NO.5/State : Shri Anil Pandey, Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma
Order On Board
08.11.2017
1 . This revision is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 23.8.2017 passed by Sessions Judge, Session Division Bemetara, (CG) wherein the said Court dismissed the appeal filed against the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bemetara wherein the said Magistrate acquitted respondents 1 to 4 with charge under Sections 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2 . Respondents 1 to 4 were charged for dishonestly removing five buffaloes from the possession of the complainant. The said buffaloes were not seized from the possession of any of the
2
respondents. It is alleged that they have sold the buffaloes, but there is no evidence that the buffaloes were identified by the complainant as his buffaloes. Charge under Section 379 of IPC can be proved by direct evidence or by evidence of seizure and identification. In the present case, there is no direct evidence against any of the respondents that they removed the buffaloes from the possession of the complainant. Again there is no seizure from any of the respondents and there is no evidence regarding identification of the buffaloes by the complainant. After marshaling evidence adduced by the prosecution, the trial Court opined that seizure is not proved in the case and no identification was done and therefore, charges are not established. Again in the appeal, the first appellate court affirmed the order of acquittal. In this revision no legal issue is raised warranting any interference with the order of the trial Court or the appellate Court and the same is not liable to be interfered with by this Court in this revision.
3 . Consequently, the revision is dismissed at the motion stage
itself.
SD/-
(Ram Prasanna Sharma)
JUDGE
Bini
Dashrath Satnami
Yashawant Koshle
Bham Chand
Nirmal @ Bhuru Markandey
Teku Markandey
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Darhi
Ram Prasanna Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
