Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: explosive substance act amendment in Unknown vs RajendranMatching Fragments
This criminal appeal is preferred by the State against the order of acquittal dated 26.02.2010 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram, in S.C.No.66 of 2009.
2. The appellant State has filed final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Ramanathapuram alleging that on 08.11.2006 at about 8.00 a.m., near the Aariyas hotel at Ramanathapuram new bus stand, without the Government permission and license, the accused was found to be in possession of 85 Jellatine sticks, 100 Detonators and 21 fuse wires in a gunny bag which is an offence punishable under Section 5(a) of the Explosive Substances (Amendment) Act, 2001 [hereinafter referred to as the Act].
9. Point for determination:
Whether the prosecution has proved the charge under Section 5(a) of the Explosive Substances [Amendment] Act, 2001 and if so what is the sentence?
10. After hearing both the parties and also after going through the evidence of the prosecution and the documentary evidence relied upon by the prosecution before the Tribunal, it is seen that P.W.2-Sub Inspector of Police, on a surprise inspection along with P.W.5 said to have seen the accused in possession of Jellatine sticks, detonators and http://www.judis.nic.in fuse wires in a gunny bag and taken into custody and effect Ex.P.2- observation mahazar in the presence of P.W.1. It is the further evidence of police witnesses P.W.2 and P.W.5 is that after registration of Ex.P.6-FIR, they went back to the scene of occurrence and prepared Ex.P.2-observation mahazar and Ex.P.7-Rough Sketch.