JUDGMENT - V.S. DESHPANDE, J.:---This appeal by the State is directed against the order of acquittal passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, on 27th March, 1973, reversing the order of conviction and sentence for offence under section 411 of the Indian Penal Code. One Gojabai was residing at village Kotawade in taluka Vita, district Sangli, She was found to have been murdered on 21st January, 1971, when she had been to a field for grazing her cattle, One Bhau Tatya Yadav was found to have committed her murder. She was wearing a golden Vajratik on her person at the time, when she was so murdered. This was disclosed in the very first information report conveyed to the Police Patil of Kotawade, who had also rushed to the scene of offence to find that the thread and the bunch of yarn of such Vajratik was lying in the said field, where the deceased was done to death. Bhau Tatya Yadav was charge-sheeted after investigation of the said murder of Gojabai, tried and convicted In the course of the investigation of the said case, it transpired that the accused had received Vajratik. Accordingly the accused was arrested on 24th January, 1971, presumably at the instance of Bhau Tatya, the accused in the main murder case. Investigation Officer, P.S.I. Wankhede, took Bhau Tatya to Karad, where the accused was staying. In the presence of panchas, he made a statement showing where the stolen property was kept by him. The loose Beeds and two boxes and part of the Vajratik were discovered by him from behind a photo from a house to which he had taken the P.S.I. and panchas. He also then made a statement to the effect that base of the Vajratik and the thread of the ornaments were thrown by him in the gutter in front of the house of one Annasaheb Jadhave and then he led the police and the panchas to the said house and produced the said articles. Panchanama (Exhibit 25) was drawn immediately and he was charge-sheeted and tried by the Magistrate in due course. 2. At the trial, the prosecution relied on the discovery evidence consisting of P.S.I. Wankhede and the two panchas Bhopate and Madane. Goldsmith Potdar also was examined, who was called to weigh the golden beeds. Three witness-Sugandha, Tanubai and Housabai were examined to identify the ornaments. 3. 2. At the trial, the prosecution relied on the discovery evidence consisting of P.S.I. Wankhede and the two panchas Bhopate and Madane. Goldsmith Potdar also was examined, who was called to weigh the golden beeds. Three witness-Sugandha, Tanubai and Housabai were examined to identify the ornaments. 3. The learned trial Judge accepted the evidence of these witnesses on the question of identity and held that what was discovered at the instance of the accused was the loose gold Beeds and the two boxes of the Vajratik, which article was stolen from the person of Gojabai, when she was done to death. The accused in hid statement under section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code denied the factum of having led the police and the panchas to the place from which the property is claimed to have been discovered as also the fact of having received the said articles. He disclaimed any connection with the said articles. Both the panchas had turned hostile. The goldsmith also appears to have been won over by the accused, However, the trial Judge relied on the evidence of the P.S.I. and found that the panchanama (Exhibit 25) corroborated his evidence, though the panchas were found to have been won over by the accused. He thus held the accused guilty of the offence under section 411 I.P.C and acquitted the accused for offence under section 414 of the I.P.C. 4. The learned Additional Sessions Judge in appeal confirmed the findings of the trial Court on the question of the accused having made the statement to the panchas and the police and the articles having been seized from the place to which the accused had taken them. He also accepted the entire evidence of the P.S.I. with regard to the discovery of these articles from two places. The Additional Sessions Judge, however, did not find it safe to rely on the evidence of the identity of the Vajratik and that is how the accused came to be acquitted. 5. Mr. Barday, the learned Public Prosecutor, contends that the findings recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge are contradictory. Having accepted the evidence of P.S.I., Wankhede and the other material corroborating the same, it was not open for the learned Additional Sessions Judge still to doubt the identity of the stolen property, particularly when the accused has not claimed the same to be his. Having accepted the evidence of P.S.I., Wankhede and the other material corroborating the same, it was not open for the learned Additional Sessions Judge still to doubt the identity of the stolen property, particularly when the accused has not claimed the same to be his. I find much substance in this contention. It is clear from the evidence, as accepted by the two courts below, that the accused was traced in the course of the investigation at the instance of Bhau, the accused in the murder case. P.S.I. Wankhede could not have obviously reached at Karad, unless in the course of the investigation the connection of the person with the accused in the murder case was disclosed. Then both the courts have accepted the prosecution evidence that the police and the panchas were led by the accused to the room after making a statement that he had kept the articles in the said room and expressed his preparedness to show the same, The loose beeds and the two boxes, in fact, were discovered by the accused from behind the photo in the said room. This evidence cannot be said to be merely about the knowledge of the accused as to where the Beeds were lying. This evidence indicated that it was the accused, who had kept these articles at the two places from where they were actually taken out by him in the presence of the panchas and the police. 6. On the question of identity, it is true that the evidence of the witnesses suffers from certain infirmities. Mr. Hombalkar, the learned Advocate appearing for the defence, is right in contending that the witnesses could have identified the Vajratik had it not been broken up and reduced to mere Beeds and base. But witnesses appear to have enough occasion not only to see the Vajratik but also the Beeds from time to time, Witness Sugandabai claims to have been in the company of the deceased Gojabai for about two years at the time of grazing cattle in the field. In the very nature of things, she must have had several occasions to sit near her and watch the Vajratik on her person. Merely because she admitted that such Vajratik can be available at any place or that the same is a common place, articles cannot in any manner detract from her identification evidence. In the very nature of things, she must have had several occasions to sit near her and watch the Vajratik on her person. Merely because she admitted that such Vajratik can be available at any place or that the same is a common place, articles cannot in any manner detract from her identification evidence. As observed by the Mysore High Court in (Re Govinda Reddy)1, A.I.R. 1958 Mys. 150, persons having occasion to see such articles carry many untranslatable impressions about the articles and their identification cannot be rejected merely because the articles happened to be of a common use. This can be true with more cogent reason with regard to the evidence of Housabai, who has been the inmate of the house, where the deceased was staying. Her cross-examination is not directed towards showing that she could not have had any occasion to see the article, when they were staying together. Secondly, the accused was not claiming the Vajratik to be his and that the Vajratik was on the person of the deceased is proved by unimpeachable evidence. In fact, reference is made in the first information report, when the accused could not have even been in the picture . I don not think is possible to agree with the view of learned Additional Sessions Judge, on this point. 7. Mr. Hombalkar also drew my attention to the evidence justifying that the accused could not be said to have been in exclusive possession of the house and also that the accused was not resident in the said house, None of the two courts have accepted this contention of the accused, To my mind, this question is irrelevant, once it is held ad proved that the article was discovered consequent on the statement made by the accused and the police and panchas were led by him to the places from where the articles were discovered. The order of acquittal thus is liable to be quashed and the conviction is liable to be restored. 8. The trial Judge sentenced the accused to six months rigorous imprisonment and the fine or Rs. 500/-. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I think that the ends of justice will be met, if the accused is sentences to suffer three months; rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. 500/-. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I think that the ends of justice will be met, if the accused is sentences to suffer three months; rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. Appeal of the State thus allowed. ------