Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1096 (PNJ)

Nachhattar Singh v. State Of Punjab

2002-10-22

HEMANT GUPTA, R.L.ANAND

body2002
Judgment R.L.Anand, J. 1. This is a Criminal revision filed by Shri Nachhattar Singh son of Kartar Singh, father of Malkiat Singh deceased and it has been directed against the judgment and order dated 28.10.1998 who convicted Kuldeep Singh, respondent No. 2, under Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo further R.I. for a period of three months. 2. Before, we may proceed into the matter, we may also make a mention that vide separate judgment of even date, we have allowed Crl.Appeal No. 516-DB-98 filed by Kuldeep Singh and his co-accused Chand Singh, under Sections 302/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and both the accused have been acquitted. We have also dismissed the Crl.Revision No. 38 of 1999 vide which it was prayed that S/Shri Kuldeep Singh and Chand Singh be given extreme penalty of death. 3. As the present Crl.Revision has come before us, therefore, we would also like to examine the legality of the judgment and order dated 28.10.1998, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, who in our opinion, has erred in recording the conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act against Shri Kuldeep Singh. 4. Brief facts of the case are that Kuldeep Singh and his cousin Shri Chand Singh, were involved in a murder case FIR No. 204 dated 2.10.1991 under Section 302/120-B IPC, registered in Police-Station, Sunam and in that connection they were wanted by the police. It is the allegation of the prosecution that Kuldeep Singh was arrested on 14.11.1991 in the area of village Jakhepal and at that time he was allegedly found in possession of 12 bore DBBL gun along with 12 live cartridges of the same bore without any licence or permit and thereby he allegedly committed an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act. 5. 5. A.S.I. Naranjan Singh was the Investigating Officer of the main case and he along other police officials and Shri Mohinder Singh son of Shri Nachhattar Singh, real brother of Malkiat Singh deceased, was present on the bridge of drain within the area of village Jakhepal in connection with the investigation of the case bearing FIR No. 204 dated 2.10.1991 P.S. Sunam, when Kuldeep Singh appeared and he was arrested and during the course of interrogation he disclosed that he had kept concealed one 12 bore gun, the barrels and Butt of which were cut, along with 12 live cartridges of the same bore in the Koop near the Watt in the fields of Piara Singh Jat resident of village Jakhepal, after wrapping the gun and the cartridges in the bag meant for fertilizer and he could get the same recovered by pointing out the place of concealment. His disclosure statement was recorded which was read over to the accused Kuldeep Singh who signed the same in token of its correctness and thereafter in pursuance of his disclosure statement he got recovered gun bearing No. 35247 and the cartridges which were taken into possession. The accused could not produce licence or permit for the possession of the gun and the cartridges as a result of which, a rukka was sent to the Police-Station, Sunam for the registration of the case on the basis of which formal FIR No. 233 dated 14.11.1991 was registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The Thanedar prepared the rough site plan of the place of recovery and he recorded the statements of the witnesses and after obtaining the sanction from the District Magistrate as required under Section 30 of the Arms Act, the accused was challaned in the court of Area Magistrate who supplied the copies of the documents to the accused. As the present case was the offshot of the main case, therefore, this case was also sent to the Court of Session for disposal. 6. A charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act was framed to which Kuldeep Singh pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial. 7. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined PW-1 Smt. Anju Nagpal, Clerk of the Office of the District Magistrate, Sangrur, who proved the sanction Ex.PA granted by the District Magistrate. 6. A charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act was framed to which Kuldeep Singh pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial. 7. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined PW-1 Smt. Anju Nagpal, Clerk of the Office of the District Magistrate, Sangrur, who proved the sanction Ex.PA granted by the District Magistrate. PW-2 is S.I. Naranjan Singh, Investigating Officer who proved the disclosure statement Ex.PB and the recovery memo Ex.PC of the gun and the cartridges and he further proved rukka Ex.PD on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PD/1 was recorded. He also proved rough site plan Ex.PE of the place of recovery. The gun is Ex.P1 and the cartridges are Exs. P.2 and P.3 and the remaining cartridges were sent to the office of Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, for comparison. PW-3 is Mr. Sukhwinder Singh, real brother of Malkiat Singh deceased. PW-4 is D.S.P. Baldev Singh who simply challaned the accused. After the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to the accused. The accused denied those circumstances and stated that he was innocent. 8. When called upon to enter into his defence, the accused did not lead any evidence. 9. Before we deal with the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, we may say that we have already held in the main case that accused was not arrested on 14.11.1991. Rather Kuldeep Singh and his companion were in the custody of the police either on 8th or 9th of October, 1991, and, therefore, the arrest of the accused on 14.11.1991 is a false version. As per the story of the prosecution, the accused was arrested on 14.11.1991. Even as per the statement of the Investigating Officer, and Shri Mohinder Singh alias Sukhwinder Singh, the arrest of the accused was as per chance. No independent witness was associated in this case at the time of effecting the recovery of the gun and the cartridges from the possession of Kuldeep Singh. Shri Mohinder Singh is the brother of Malkiat Singh deceased who was murdered in this case and, therefore, his testimony is not of independent nature. He was out and out to ensure that accused is convicted. Shri Mohinder Singh is the brother of Malkiat Singh deceased who was murdered in this case and, therefore, his testimony is not of independent nature. He was out and out to ensure that accused is convicted. In the absence of any independent evidence, we are inclined to hold that the accused was not arrested by the police on 14.11.1991. The moment it is held that accused Kuldeep Singh was not arrested on 14.11.1991 then in such a situation the recovery of the gun and the cartridges in pursuance of the disclosure statement is also doubtful. Therefore, by giving the benefit of doubt to the appellant and suo motu examining the legality of the conviction and sentence, we dismiss this revision by holding that prosecution has not been able to prove the charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act against Shri Kuldeep Singh who stands acquitted in this case also. He shall be set at liberty forthwith if not wanted or required in any other case.