CRIMINAL APPEAL No.25 OF 1993 (U/S) Appeal against the judgment and order dated 19.12.1992 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 199 of 1988/16 of 1990 by Shri Shyam Deo Singh, 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas. SHAHDA KHATOON, Wife of Amjad Ali @ Munnu, Resident of Mohalla Noorganj, P.S.- Sasaram, District-Rohtas. …………(Appellant) Versus 1. AMJAD ALI @ MUNNU. 2. Rutam Mian. 3. Ekram Mian. All sons of Qurban Mian. 4. Qurban Mian @ Jhingur Mian, Son of Rahman Mian. 5. Hasina Bibi, Wife of Qurban Mian. All residents of Village-Nunsari, P.S.-Nokha, District-Rohtas. …………..(Respondents) ----------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment dated 19.12.1992 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 199 of 1988/16 of 1990 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas for the offences under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondents have been convicted for the said offence and sentenced to undergo RI for one year by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, - 2 - Sasaram in Complaint Case No. 38 (C) of 1985 but in appeal the respondents were acquitted. The case of the complainant is that the appellant was married to respondent, Amjad Ali @ Munnu thirteen years ago but due to marital discord she was thrown out of the house but her articles which had been given to her by way of dowry have been misappropriated by the accused persons. The appellate court while considering the case of the complainant considered the submission that since the articles had never been handed over to the respondents they were being used with full consent of the appellant and there was no entrustment nor criminal misappropriation of the same. Considering the essential ingredients of Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code, the trial court considered that the articles had been taken by the appellant to her Sasural and used by all of them and they had not been entrusted to the respondents and since the same have been done 14 to 15 years ago and in constant use there was - 3 - no question of return of the same. In view of the said discussion the appellate court acquitted the respondents. Having gone through the judgment of the trial court as well as appellate court and the evidence on record, I am also of the view that since there was no entrustment of any articles to the respondents there was no consequent misappropriation and therefore no offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. In view of the above discussions, the appeal is dismissed. Patna High Court Dated 14th December, 2009 NAFR/Vikash (Anjana Prakash, J.)