1 jpc/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 609 OF 2008 Statement of Maharashtra .. Applicant Vs. Shri Tanaji Bhagwan Ghorpade .. Respondent Shri Y. S. Shinde, APP for the Applicant -State CORAM :SMT. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 21st July, 2009. P. C. 1. This is an application for leave to appeal under Section 378(4) filed by the State against the accused/respondent who is charged under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code and is acquitted from the said offence by the judgment and order dated 19.12.2003 passed by the J.M.F.C. Deorukh. 2. Learned APP appearing for the State has submitted that the prosecution could prove the six incidents of sale of Gold ornaments by the principal accused No.1 to accused No.2 i.e. the respondent. He has further submitted that some ornaments which were sold by the accused No.1 to accused No.2 were identified by the complainant and this series of acts of sell and purchase of gold ornaments between accused no.1 and accused no.2 is sufficient to show the involvement of accused No.2. Learned JMFC ought to have considered this fact and the accused No.2 also would have been convicted. 2 3. Respondent No.2 is simplicitor charged under Section 411 of the I.P. C. To prove the office under this section, prosecution needs to establish the fact of guilty knowledge or awareness of the purchasers that the the property is stolen property. Only six incidents of the transaction of sale and purchase between accused No.1 and 2 cannot establish the fact of knowledge. The learned Trial Judge has properly appreciated the evidence tendered by the prosecution. I do not find any ground to interfere in the order passed by the learned JMFC. 4. Leave under section 378 (4) of Criminal Procedure Code is refused and the application is rejected. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)