Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ranjit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 27 August, 2014
Author: Kuldip Singh
Bench: Kuldip Singh
CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004
Date of Decision : 27.8.2014
Ranjit Singh alias Kala son of Sukhwinder Singh ....... Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ........ Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH
Present:- Mr. Ravi Malhotra, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. M.S. Kang, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab,
for respondent-State.
KULDIP SINGH, J.
By way of present appeal, Ranjit Singh @ Kala has challenged the judgment and order dated 28/29.9.2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kapurthala, vide which accused/appellant was convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. This sentence was directed to run concurrently with the sentence awarded in main case FIR No. 12 of 14.3.2002.
Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 4.4.2002, ASI Attar Singh (PW6) accompanied by his fellow officials under the supervision of SI/SHO Charanjit Singh, had conducted a Nakabandi at G.T. Road, Bus Stand Chowk Miyan Badarpur after forming different police parties in connection with investigation and search of the accused in SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -2- FIR No. 12 of 2002 under Sections 395, 342 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. In the meanwhile, a motorcycle No. PB-02-V-8281 mark Yamaha came from Amritsar side. Three young boys were riding the motorcycle. They were signalled by SI Charanjit Singh to stop. However, the motorcyclist tried to turn back the motorcycle. However, the police party apprehended all the three boys. On questioning, the motorcycle driver disclosed his name as Sukhwant Singh @ Pappi son of Raghbir Singh, resident of Partap Nagar, B-Division, Amritsar. The pillion rider disclosed his name as Gurpal Singh @ Pala son of Sukhwant Singh, resident of village Haith, Mohalla Guru Nanak Pura, Police Station Raja Sansi, District Amristar. The third pillion rider disclosed his name as Ranjit Singh @ Kala son of Sukhwinder Singh, resident of Rodiwal Meerakot Chowk, Police Station Sadar, Amritsar. Darshan Singh, Municipal Councillor of Dhilwan was joined in the police party as independent witness. SI/SHO Charanjit Singh directed ASI Attar Singh to conduct the search of Ranjit Singh and Sukhwinder Singh @ Pappi and he himself conducted the search of Gurpal Singh @ Pala.
ASI Attar Singh conducted the personal search of Ranjit Singh @ Kala, on which a country made 303 bore pistol in working order was recovered. On unloading the same, one live cartridge of 303 bore was recovered. Another live cartridge of 303 bore was recovered from the pocket of the pant of the accused. Accused could not produce any licence to keep the arm and ammunition. Thereafter, ruqa (Ex.PW6/A) was sent to police station, where formal FIR No. 20 dated 4.4.2002 (Ex.PW6/B) was registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Site plan of place of SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -3- recovery (Ex.PW6/C) was prepared.
During the course of investigation, the arm was got tested from HC Raman Kumar, Head Armourer, Police Line, Kapurthala, who submitted his report Ex.PW1/B, wherein he opined that the pistol is in working order. Rough sketch of pistol (Ex.PW1/A) was prepared.
After obtaining sanction (Ex.PW3/A) of District Magistrate, Kapurthala, the challan was presented in the Court.
Accused/appellant was chargesheeted under Sections 25 of the Arms Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In support of its case, prosecution examined Head Constable Raman Kumar, Head Armourer, Police Line, Kapurthala (PW1), HC Gurmail Singh (PW2), Mukhtiar Singh, Reader to District Magistrate, Kapurthala (PW3), HC Mohinder Singh (PW4), HC Balwinder Singh (PW5), ASI Attar Singh (PW6) and thereafter, prosecution closed the evidence.
When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused pleaded innocence and claimed that he has been falsely in the present case. No recovery was effected from him. Accused did not lead any evidence in defence.
After hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, learned counsel for the accused and going through the file, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kapurthala, convicted and sentenced the accused aforesaid.
I have heard learned counsel for the accused/appellant, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and have also carefully SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -4- gone through the file.
ASI Attar Singh has unfolded the prosecution story. He has stated that they had conducted Nakabandi in connection with investigation of a case. He has also deposed that on 4.4.2002, at about 5:00 AM, a motorcycle No. PB-02-V-8281 came from Amritsar side and that the same was signalled to stop. Accused was among the three persons, who were apprehended at the spot. Darshan Singh, Municipal Councillor, was joined in the police party. He has further deposed that he had conducted the search of Ranjit Singh (accused), which resulted in recovery of country made 303 bore pistol (Ex.P1). On unloading the same, one live cartridge was recovered. Another live cartridge was recovered from the pocket of the pant of the accused. His statement is supported by HC Gurmail Singh (PW2).
Clerk of the District Magistrate, Kapurthala, Mukhtiar Singh (PW3) has proved that the District Magistrate, Kapurthala, has granted the sanction to prosecute the accused under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
HC Raman Kumar, Head Armourer, Police Line, Kapurthala, (PW1) has proved that he had mechanically tested the country made pistol and submitted the report that it is in working order. HC Raman Kumar had done the Armourer Course from CSWT BSF, Indore in the year 1987 and is having vast experience in testing the weapons. In cross examination, he was asked whether he had test fired the weapon, to which he replied in negative.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant has argued that accused in this case has been falsely implicated. It has been argued that SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -5- the prosecution case is based on the testimony of official witnesses only. The only independent witness Darshan Singh, Municipal Councillor, Dhilwan has not been examined.
I am of the view that non-examination of independent witness is immaterial. The Court is to see whether the statements of the Investigating Officer and other witnesses are reliable. In this case, it comes out that on the same day, police had registered a case bearing FIR No. 12 of 2002 under Sections 395, 342 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. It was in this connection that they had conducted Nakabandi for checking the vehicles. The same is a normal practice of the police when such an occurrence takes place. It was during the surprise checking that accused alongwith his two co-accused was apprehended and a country made 303 bore pistol was recovered from the accused. There is nothing on file to show that police had any enmity or ill-will with the accused and that police had falsely implicated the accused. Even the accused do not belong to the area where the dacoity was committed. They have no reason to come from their native place towards Dhilwan side in the early hours of the morning at about 5:00 AM. It is not the case of the accused that he was picked up from his native place and this case was planted upon him. It goes to show that the accused was found within the jurisdiction of Police Station Dhilwan in the early hours of the morning when the dacoity was committed in the jurisdiction of Police Station Dhilwan and the police was searching for the suspects. Merely non-examination of the independent witness is immaterial.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant has further argued SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004 -6- that in this case the pistol was not test fired. Therefore, it cannot be said that the pistol was in working order.
I am of the view that the Head Armourer HC Raman Kumar (PW1) has specifically stated that he had mechanically tested the pistol and same was found to be in working order. No question was put to the Head Armourer (PW1) as to in which manner he has tested the pistol to show that no proper mechanical test was done to check the firing capability of the pistol. It being so, the testimony of HC Raman Kumar, Head Armourer (PW1) cannot be disbelieved.
No other argument was raised by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant.
In view of the foregoing discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Thus, CRA No. S-2114-SB of 2004, filed by accused/appellant Ranjit Singh alias Kala stands dismissed. Accused is on bail. His bail bond and surety bond are cancelled. Accused/appellant Ranjit Singh alias Kala be immediately arrested and committed to jail to undergo the remaining part of sentence (KULDIP SINGH) JUDGE 27.8.2014 sjks SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2014.08.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document