Faheem Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7623 MP

                                       1


  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR

   SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE JUSTICE NANDITA DUBEY

             Criminal Appeal. No.1006/2014

                      Faheem Khan
                            Vs.

                  State of Madhya Pradesh

____________________________________________________
     Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, learned counsel for the
     appellant.


     Shri Akshay Pawar, learned Panel Lawyer for the
     respondent/State.




                    JUDGMENT

(24.11.2021)

This criminal appeal has been filed by the

appellant being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence

dated 23.01.2014 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Bhopal

in S.T. No.585/2012, whereby the appellant has been found

guilty for the offence punishable under Section 392 of I.P.C.

and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years

and fine of Rs.5,000/-, with a stipulation for six months

further rigorous imprisonment in case of default.

As per the prosecution, complainant Smt. Sangita

Sahu (P.W.-2) has lodged a complaint at Police Station Koh-

E-Fiza, Bhopal that while she was going to Peergate with

her husband on Scooty, two persons suddenly came on

motor cycle and snatched her gold mangal sootra. On the

basis of aforesaid complaint, FIR was registered and

investigation was started. On the basis of the investigation,

the present appellant came to be arrested. On the

memorandum of the present appellant (Ex. P-5), a gold

mangal sootra was recovered from the house of the

accused. Test identification parade was conducted, in

which the complainant identified the accused. She further

identified the recovered mangal sootra. After completion of

the investigation, charge sheet was filed. The trial Court

framed the charge under Section 392 of the I.P.C. The

accused/appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence.

The learned trial Court relying on the statement of

complainant (P.W.-2), the seizure memo (Ex. P-5), as well as

the statement of witnesses of seizure has found the

accused/appellant guilty for the offence as alleged and

convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid.

On perusal of the record, it is seen that the

complainant as well as witnesses of the seizure have been

very consistent in their testimony. The accused person in

his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. failed to give any

plausible reason as to how he came to be in possession of

the said article.

On due appreciation of the evidence on record, I find

that the trial Court has not committed any illegality and

perversity in convicting the appellant. Under the

circumstances, the appeal fails and the conviction of the

appellant is upheld and affirmed.

This appeal stands dismissed.

(Nandita Dubey) Judge SMT. GEETHA NAIR gn 2021.11.25 12:07:36 +05'30'