MANZUR HUSSAIN Versus THE STATE Nemo , -

Through this single judgment I propose to dispose of three Criminal Revision Nos.71, 72 and 73 of 1984 filed by Manzoor Hussain petitioner against the judgments, dated 25‑2‑1984 of Sessions Judge, Sahiwal.

2. The facts leading to these three revisions briefly are that during the investigation of case F.I.R. No.5/1982 under section 457/380, P.P.C., Aftab Ahmad S.H.O., Police Station Chichawatni recovered tape‑recorder, two silver bangles, one silver Saghla and an iron girder under section 550, Cr.P.C. from the house of the petitioner. Thereafter, Muhammad Yaqoob, Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Inayat Hussain appeared in the Police Station Chichawatni. The iron girder was identified by Muhammad Yaqoob as his stolen property, so case F.I.R. No.21 under section 379/411, P.P.C. was registered against the petitioner. The tape‑recorder was identified as stolen property of Muhammad Aslam, therefore, a case F.I.R. No.30 dated 12‑2‑1982 under section 380, P.P.C. was registered against the petitioner. Muhammad Inayat Hussain identified silver Sagla as his property, so F.I.R. No.23 of 1982 under section 457/380/411, P.P.C. was registered against the petitioner. Three separate challans were submitted against him. The learned trial Court convicted him in the three cases under section 411, P.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo one year R.I. in each case. He filed three separate appeals against his convictions and sentences which were dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal. Hence these revisions.

3. No one has appeared for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State has tried to support the impugned judgments.

4. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that the stolen property allegedly recovered from the petitioner at one and the same time was part of three different thefts committed on three different dates. There is no evidence to prove that the stolen properties were received at three different times. So, three separate trials and three separate convictions and three sentences under section 411, P.P.C. cannot be sustained. Reliance may be placed on P L D 1955 FC 183.

5. For what has been said above, the three revisions are accepted and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges. He is on bail. He stands discharged of bail bonds.

N.H.Q./M‑2465/L

Revision petitions accepted.