(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.411— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.114 Illustration(a)— Dishonestly receiving stolen property – Reverse burden of proof – Legality – Accused had allegedly murdered deceased, stolen his cash and appellant co-accused had received part of stolen cash and helped accused in causing disappearance of evidence – Trail court had acquitted accused from the charge u/S. 302 IPC and accused and co-accused from the charge u/Ss. 201 and 379 IPC – However both accused were found to be guilty of offence punishable u/S. 411 IPC – High Court confirmed said conviction observing that mere claim by accused persons that cash belonged to them was not sufficient to prove that cash so recovered from them was their personal cash – Held, High Court had grossly erred in placing reverse burden of proof on accused to account for cash in their possession, by applying presumption u/S. 114 of the Evidence Act – In absence of any convincing evidence regarding amount being carried by deceased, from mere recovery of cash from possession of accused, it could not be inferred that said amount was stolen goods – Prosecution had failed to establish foundational fact of theft of goods and possession thereof by accused soon after incident – Conviction was set aside.
CRL.A.M.P. No. 439 of 2010 dated 7.03.2024 (Tel)-Reversed(Paras 13.213.313.41414.114.2)
(B) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.411— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Dishonestly receiving stolen property – Conviction for – Challenge against Appellant had allegedly received amount recovered from him form accused out of money that was stolen by accused from deceased after committing his murder – To establish culpability u/S. 411 of Penal Code, it must be proved that accused had dishonestly received or retained stolen property and in doing so, he either had knowledge or reason to believe that same was stolen property – Since both the Courts below had acquitted accused persons from the charge of theft, , question of them committing an offence of dishonestly receiving stolen property punishable u/S 411 IPC, did not arise – Conviction was set aside.
CRL.A.M.P. No. 439 of 2010 dated 7.03.2024 (Tel)-Reversed(Paras 1515.115.315.415.6)