TMI Blog1975 (12) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ead Constable, Jagat Singh (PW 1) Jagat Singh had detected a case under Section 411, I.P.C. on April 25, 1968. In that case one Rameshwar Dass of Ambala City was arrested by Jagat Singh at Murthal Bus Stand after searching his person and recovering from him 20 gold coins and 47 gold bangles weighing 101 tolas. Rameshwar Das was produced in court on April 27, 1968 and was remanded to judicial custody till April 29. In order to help Rameshwar Dass, Om Prakash and Sulekh Chand, who were co-accused with the appellant (since acquitted) apparently took the help of the appellant to approach Jagat Singh to save Rameshwar Dass from the Criminal case. The appellant suggested to Jagat Singh to substitute the seized gold coins by 20 other gold coins wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sought to be established by the evidence of PW 1, Jagat Singh, PW 2, Ajit Singh, PW 4, Ram Singh, S.H.O. and PW 6, D.S.P., Gurbhaksh Singh. One of the witnesses of the raiding party was given up as being won over by the appellant. Nathuram (PW 3), proprietor of the Hotel, also did not fully support the prosecution case and was declared hostile by the prosecutor. 5. The special Judge, Rohtak convicted the appellant and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and acquitted the other two co-accused, as stated earlier. The High Court on appeal maintained the conviction and sentence. Hence this appeal by special leave. 6. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and are unable to find any infirmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave even avoided requesting for permission to cross-examine the witness under Section 154 of the Evidence Act. But the fact that the court gave permission to the Prosecutor to cross-examine his own witness, thus characterising him as, what is described as a hostile witness, does not completely his evidence. The evidence remains admissible in the trial and there is no legal bar to base a conviction upon his testimony if corroborated by other reliable evidence. We are satisfied in this case that the evidence of Jagat Singh, but for whose prompt assistance the case would not have seen the light of day and whose statement had immediately been recorded by the D.S.P., is amply corroborated by other evidence mentioned above to i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
