Allahabad High Court
Baldeva vs Bishambhar And Another on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1556 of 1981
Appellant :- Baldeva
Respondent :- Bishambhar And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- V.C. Mishra
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Matter taken up in the revised list.
No one appears on behalf of the appellant to press this appeal.
Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 is also not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State is present.
This Court proceeds to decide the matter with the assistance of learned counsel for the State.
The present appeal has been filed before this Court with the following prayers:-
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this appeal and set aside the judgment and order of the lower Appellate court for the delivery of the Engine to accused Opp. party, entrusted in the Supurdgi of the appellant. Further pleased to stay the order of the lower Appellate court for delivery of the Engine to the accused opp. party entrusted with the appellant, pending disposal of this appeal."
The facts of the case are that a theft of the engine of the appellant took place in the intervening night of 26/27.03.1974 from his tube-well and a First Information Report about the same was lodged in the next morning at about 02:30 pm. The stolen engine was recovered on 25th June, 1974 from the possession of the opposite party no.1 who was then the accused in the matter and a case proceeded under Section 411 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and denied the recovery of the said engine in his statement recorded on 11.12.1975 but the said recovery stood proved and the accused in his statement recorded on 12.05.1979 admitted the recovery for the first time by stating that the engine belongs to him and deposited its plate. The trial court vide judgment and order dated 04.08.1979 convicted the accused-opposite party no.1 under Section 411 IPC and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment holding that the property is a stolen property.
Against the said judgment and order of conviction, the accused filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge concerned which was allowed vide order dated 16.01.1981 and the said engine was entrusted in the supurdgi of the appellant. The said order by giving engine in supurdgi could not be given effect to for certain reasons.
The office report dated 30.06.2021 states that the appellant Baldeva has died, whereabouts of the respondent no.1 Bishambhar is not known because his father's name is not known. Reports dated 06.03.2020, 29.06.2020, 02.07.2020, 10.07.2020, 14.08.2020, 24.03.2021 and 30.03.2021 have been received from the CJM concerned to the said effect.
I have perused the said reports. It is reported that the appellant Baldeva has died around 35 years back as reported in the report dated 24.03.2021. Due enquiry has been done for the same. Even the other reports state about the same.
In so far as the opposite party no.1 Bishambhar is concerned, his father's name is not known and hence his whereabouts could not be known.
The present appeal is thus dismissed as the prayers relate to transfer of the alleged engine to the appellant but he has died.
Office to communicate this order to the concerned District and Sessions Judge for information and necessary action.
Order Date :- 24.5.2022
M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
