9911796707
TMI Blog1943 (8) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d back the ornaments on 2nd October 1942, the petitioner said that he had melted away the ornaments and therefore could not return them. 2. A complaint was then filed on 6th October 1942 and the petitioner was summoned for 22nd October 1942. It appears that the complainant used to pawn ornaments with the petitioner from time to time. Exhibit D, dated 17th October 1939, refers to a gold bali pawned for Rs. 20; there is no time limit mentioned in it. Exhibit E, dated 19th November 1939, refers to a gold bali for Rs. 20 in which also there is no time limit mentioned. Exhibit C, dated 31st December 1940, refers to a gold jugnu for Rs. 50 in which also no time limit is mentioned. Then Ex. B is a loan of Rs. 10 taken on 30th March 1941. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing in writing to show that this was the condition. Whatever documents have been produced in connexion with the pawning transactions between the parties, do not show that any date was fixed for the redemption of the articles. The lower appellate Court has. observed that it was not contended on behalf of the accused that the pledge was for a. shorter term than three years. That is true; but the documents do not support the statement that it was for three years, and what has been contended before me is that no period was fixed. It is difficult to rely upon the oral evidence that the period fixed was three years. 5. Now, when there is no fixed period, then the case has to be dealt with from that point of view. In such circum stances the deb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and he becomes on such re-sales liable for the value thereof as for a conversion. So, in the present case, after the notice given to the opposite party, the liability of the petitioner is only of a civil nature. Now, the charge against the petitioner was that on or about 30th July 1941, to 31st December 1941 at Gurbatta Sonartoli, P.S. Khaja Kalan, being entrusted with certain property, to wit, one gold jugnu, two gold balis, two gold hareh, two gold haraia and two gold surahi of Rs. 8-2-0 bhars and worth Rs. 450 he committed a criminal breach of trust in respect of the ornaments and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 406, Penal Code. 7. There are no less than nine ornaments mentioned in this charge and it is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
