Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ram Mehar And Others vs State Of Haryana on 9 August, 2010
Author: Jora Singh
Bench: Jora Singh
Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.Appeal No.740-SB of 2002
Date of decision: 9.9.2010
Ram Mehar and others
... Appellants
versus
State of Haryana
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH.
Present: Mr.Hemant Bassi Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr.Paramjit Batta, Addl.AG, Haryana.
...
JORA SINGH, J.
Ram Mehar, Vinit, Virender, Satpal, Anil Kumar, Ram Niwas and Sukhbir preferred this appeal to impugn the judgment of conviction dated 18.4.2002 and order of sentence dated 19.4.2002 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Hisar, in Criminal Case No.22 SC dated 11.5.2001/3.1.2002, arising out of FIR No. 236 dated 23.11.2000 under Sections 399/402 IPC, Police Station Sadar, Hansi.
By the impugned judgment, they were convicted under Sections 399/402 IPC. Ram Mehar and Virender were also convicted under Section 25 of Arms Act, and sentenced to undergo RI for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- each under Section 399 IPC and to undergo RI for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each under Section 402 IPC. Ram Mehar and Virender were also directed to undergo RI for one year under Section 25 of the Arms Act. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to further undergo RI for three months.
All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 2 Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 23.11.2000, police party headed by Inspector Khairati Lal, CIA Staff, Hansi, while present on Hisar- Hansi road near Pir Baba, Hansi, then received secret information that 7 persons, namely, Ram Mehar, Vinit, Virender, Satpal, Anil Kumar, Ram Niwas and Sukhbir present in a deserted kotha near power house were planning and making preparation to commit dacoity. As per secret information, raid was conducted. Accused were over heard while saying that they were to loot the passers by. After raiding the kotha, accused were apprehended. On personal search of Vinit and Varinder, one .12 bore pistol loaded with one live cartridge was recovered from each of them. Country made pistol of .32 bore loaded with one live cartridge was recovered from Ram Mehar. Chain was recovered from Satpal. Recovered weapons and cartridges were separately sealed by the Investigating Officer with his own seal bearing impression `KL'. Chain was also taken into police possession vide separate memo attested by the witnesses. One motor cycle and a scooter were found parked in front of kotha. Vehicles were also taken into police possession vide separate memo attested by the witnesses. Ruqa was sent to the concerned police station, on the basis of which, formal FIR was recorded. On return to the police station, case property was deposited with the Incharge of Malkhana.
After completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court.
Accused were charged under Sections 399/402 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Prosecution examined Constable Lal Singh, who tendered his affidavit (Ex.PA).
Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 3
PW2 SI Hawa Singh had simply prepared report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
PW3 ASI Jagmal Singh on receipt of ruqa (Ex.PB), had recorded formal FIR (Ex.PB/1).
PW4 HC Zora Singh stated that on 31.12.2000, he was serving as Armourer in Police Lines, Hisar. On the application of ASI Jitender Singh, he had mechanically tested three different country made pistols. Pistols were in working condition. After test, weapons were again sealed with seal bearing impression `ZS'. Sealed parcels were handed over to ASI Jatinder Singh. Cartridges were also found to be live cartridges.
PW5 ASI Rattan Lal was with the party of Inspector Khairati Lal and stated that on 23.11.2000, police party headed by Inspector Khairati Lal received secret information that seven persons sitting in a kotha near electricity power house were planning and making preparation to commit dacoity. Raid was conducted and accused were apprehended. Weapons were recovered from the accused and the same were taken into police possession vide separate memos attested by the witnesses.
PW6 Inspector Khairati Lal is the Investigating Officer. After close of the prosecution evidence, statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied all the prosecution allegations and pleaded to be innocent.
Defence version of the accused was that they were brought from their houses in the presence of Sarpanch and Member Panchayat by saying that they were to be interrogated.
In defence, DW1 Birbal appeared.
After hearing learned Public Prosecutor for the State, learned Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 4 defence counsel for the accused and from the perusal of evidence on the file, accused were convicted and sentenced as stated aforesaid.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned State counsel and have gone through the evidence on the file.
After arguing for some time, when learned counsel for the appellants failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment, then stated that judgment of trial Court is not challenged on the point of conviction. Appellants remained in custody for more than five months. Occurrence is dated 23.11.2000. At that time, Ram Mehar and Satpal were 26 years' old, Vinit was 19 years' old, Virender and Anil were 18 years' old, Ram Niwas was 28 years' old and Sukhbir was 29 years' old. According to story, appellants were planning to commit dacoity but actually they had not committed any crime. No other case against Sukhbir and Ram Niwas. Requested to take lenient view.
Learned State counsel argued that appellants fully armed were planning to commit dacoity. There was a secret information. Raid was conducted, then appellants were apprehended from the specified place. Evidence on file was rightly appreciated by the trial Court.
Evidence on the file shows that Inspector Khairati Lal along with party was present near Pir Baba, Hansi. Then at about 5.00 PM, received secret information that Ram Mehar, Vinit, Virender, Satpal, Anil Kumar, Ram Niwas and Sukhbir present in a deserted kotha near power house were planning and making preparation to commit dacoity. As per secret information, raid was conducted. Then the appellants were arrested. Two .12 bore pistols and one .32 bore pistol were recovered from Vinit, Virender and Ram Mehar, respectively. Chain of motor cycle was Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 5 recovered from Satpal. Appellants were not in possession of licence issued by any authority to retain the weapons. Before recovery, appellants had no enmity with the police party. So, there was no idea to implicate the appellants. Evidence on the file was rightly scrutinized by the trial Court. Weapons were produced before the Armourer and the same were found to be in working condition. Cartridges recovered were also found to be live. No licence to retain the weapons.
In the light of above discussion, judgment of trial Court is upheld on the point of conviction.
Occurrence is dated 23.11.2000. At that time, three appellants were about 18/19 years' old and four accused were between 26 years to 29 years of age. Ram Mehar has already undergone 6 months and 8 days, Vinit has already undergone 6 months and 14 days, Virender has already undergone 6 months and 12 days, Satpal has already undergone 5 months and 21days, Anil has already undergone 6 months and 6 days, Ram Niwas has already undergone 6 months and 12 days and Sukhbir has already undergone 5 months and 20 days. Appellants are to become hard criminals if again sent to jail. Ends of justice would be fully met if lenient view is taken.
Keeping in view the circumstances of this case, appellants are directed to undergo imprisonment already undergone (6 months and 8 days in case of Ram Mehar, 6 months and 14 days in case of Vinit, 6 months and 12 days in case of Virender, 5 months and 21 days in case of Satpal, 6 months and 6 days in case of Anil, 6 months and 12 days in case of Ram Niwas and 5 months and 20 days in case of Sukhbir). Fine maintained.
For the reasons recorded above, appeal without merit is Crl.Appeal No. 740-SB of 2002 6 dismissed with modification qua sentence.
9.9.2010 ( JORA SINGH ) pk JUDGE