Twelve years after he was arrested on the charges of robbery, a hawker has been acquitted by the Bombay High Court pointing out that the trial court erred in relying only on the recovery of gold, that too in melted form, to convict him.
Justice VM Kanade heard the appeal, filed in 2001 by Harish Yadav (23), challenging the trial court’s order, convicting him under Section 392 (robbery). Yadav was sentenced to five-year rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs 5,000.
Prosecution said, on March 31, 1998 four people entered Rajashree Jewellers, owned by Sunil Kumar Fattelalji Jain, and took gold jewellery after assaulting him with a chopper. Yadav was arrested and the stolen gold was recovered at his instance from Varanasi. The goldsmith’s statement was recorded and six witnesses were examined. Yadav was convicted.
Amicus curie Nihar Garg submitted that no identification parade was held by the police and neither Jain nor the goldsmith had identified Yadav. He submitted that the goldsmith identified Yadav only in court.
Garg argued that the gold recovered at his instance was in melted form and not in the form of ornaments and, as such, there was no material to show that this was the gold which was stolen from the jewellery shop.
Additional public prosecutor VR Bhosale submitted that the recovery of the ornaments was one of the circumstances on which the reliance was placed by the trial court and therefore there was no reason to set aside the finding.
