Allowed

Sunil Kumar v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Aug 2012CRA-S/1354/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant challenged conviction and sentence under Section 25 of the Arms Act for possessing a pistol without a license. The High Court held that prosecution failed to prove its case beyond doubt due to discrepancies, absence of a key witness, and implications from acquittal in related FIR. Appeal allowed and appellant acquitted.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence under Section 25 of the Arms Act set aside; appellant acquitted.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Punjab — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Appeal No.1354-SB of 2001

¶5

Date of Decision : 01.08.2012

Sunil Kumar @ Sonu

.......Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

.......Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶12

Present: Ms. Rahish Pahwa Dudeja, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶13

Mr. Mehardeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶14

¶15

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.

¶16

The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 17.10.2001, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, (hereinafter as 'the trial Court'), convicting the accused-appellant for committing offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period three years.

¶17

The brief facts of the case in hand, as recorded by the learned trial Court in para 2 of the impugned judgment, are reproduced as under:-

¶18

“2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on

¶19

-2-

¶20

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶21

24.11.2000, SI Tehal Singh, ASI Balbir Singh, HC Lakhbir Singh from CIA Staff Ludhiana were present with police party under overall supervision of SI Jagtar Singh and they were present within area of Village Gaunsgarh behind power house of P.S.E.B. in connection with investigation of case under Section 399/402 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act registered with P.S. Basti Jodhewal, having conducted a raid there. They saw five persons sitting at a deserted place and those five persons were apprehended by the police party. Police party headed by SI, Tehal Singh had apprehended the accused. On being enquired accused disclosed his name as Sunil Kumar Verma son of Jadgish Mittal, resident of Street No.5, Mohalla Kishanpura, Division No.8 Jalandhar, currently at New Subhash Nagar, Street No.6, Ludhiana, Personal search of the accused was conducted which led to the recovery of one country made pistol of 303 bore alongwith a live cartridge of the same bore wrapped in a polythene in right fold of his wear pant and he could not produce any licence for possession of pistol and cartridge. SI Tehal Singh prepared rough sketch of recovered pistol as Ex. PB attested by ASI Balbir Singh and HC Lakhbir Singh and on being unloaded it was

¶22

-3-

¶23

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶24

found to contain one live cartridge, therefore, SI Tehal Singh prepared sealed parcel of recovered pistol Ex.P-1 and cartridges Ex.P2 and Ex.P-3 sealing that with his seal having letters 'TS' taking said parcel in possession vide recovery memo Ex.PC attested by ASI Balbir Singh and HC Lakhbir Singh, SI Tehal Singh sent ruqa Ex.PD to Police Station Basti Jodhewal through HC Balbir Singh at 7-00 P.M. on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PD/1 was recorded at Police Station Basti Jodhewal by ASI Surinder Singh. Accused was produced before SI Jagtar Singh alongwith recovered pistol and cartridges and accused was interrogated in this main case. While arresting the accused, his personal search was conducted which resulted in recovery of currency note worth Rs.30/. Memo of Jamatalashi Ex.PF was prepared attested by SI Balbir Singh and HC Lakhbir Singh. Signatures of the accused was obtained on that memo. The I.O. Prepared rough site plan of place of recovery as Ex.PE. On return to the police station, the I.O. Deposited the case property with MHC and put the accused in lock up. During investigation the recovered pistol and cartridges were got attested from ASI Dev Raj who vide his report Ex.PG found that pistol was in working condition and cartridges

¶25

-4-

¶26

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶27

were live ones. ”

¶28

Charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act was framed against the accused-appellant to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

¶29

In order to substantiate the charges against the accused, the prosecution examined Prabhjit Singh, Ahlmad to District Magistrate, Ludhiana as PW1; SI Tehal Singh as PW2; ASI Lakhbir Singh, who was working as HC with CIA Staff, Ludhiana as PW3; and ASI Dev Raj Armour, Police Line, Ludhiana, as PW4.

¶30

In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accusedappellant denied all the allegations of the prosecution case and pleaded false implication. He contended that the police had illegally detained him at CIA staff, Ludhiana, and thereafter, a false case was planted upon him. However, he did not lead any evidence in defence.

¶31

The learned trial Court, after hearing both the parties, convicted the accused-appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced him for the term as indicated in para 1 of this judgment. Hence the present appeal.

¶32

The appellant came up in this appeal which was admitted on 26.11.2001.

¶33

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant was booked in this case. He was picked up by the CIA Staff,

¶34

-5-

¶35

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶36

Ludhiana, several days before the alleged occurrence. The FIR in this case was registered on 24.11.2002. The record of illicit weapon is shown to be effected from the possession of the appellant on 24.11.2002. She pointed out some discrepancies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, which goes to the root of the case and makes the prosecution case doubtful.

¶37

The State counsel argued that the prosecution has fully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

¶38

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

¶39

As the appellant was allegedly apprehended in FIR No.165 of 24.11.2000, under Sections 399/402 IPC of Police Station Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana, there is every possibility that due to over zealousness of the Police, this recovery of illicit weapon might have been planted on him, in order to provide foundation to the main case. Vide separate judgments of even date, the appellant is being acquitted in above FIR No.165 dated 24.11.2000, under Sections 399/402 IPC.

¶40

The prosecution has failed to examine Bagga Singh, Lambardar of Village Boothgarh, a public witness, in this case, who was readily available with the police. There is no explanation as to why he was withheld in this case, thought his statement was recorded in the main case under Sections 399/402 IPC.

¶41

The observation of the learned trial Court that “If the accused had been roped in wrongly, he would not have kept quite” is

¶42

-6-

¶43

CRA No.1354-SB of 2001

¶44

erroneous in the facts and circumstances of the case. The prosecution has to stand on its own legs and no adverse inference can be drawn against the accused for not moving to the higher authorities.

¶45

The cumulative effect of all these circumstances is that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond doubt. So, the appellant-accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.

¶46

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed, the judgment/order dated 17.10.2001, of conviction and sentence, are set aside and the accused-appellant is acquitted of the charge framed against him.

¶47

01.08.2012 atulsethi

¶48

( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) JUDGE

¶49

Note: Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No

Sunil Kumar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Manjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kabul Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Swaran Singh Vs State of Punjab

Swaran Singh Vs State of Punjab