High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ashok vs State Of Haryana on 16 June, 2011

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashok vs State Of Haryana on 16 June, 2011
Crl. Appeal No.935-SB of 2002                                  [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB                      AND HARYANA AT
               CHANDIGARH.



                                      Crl. Appeal No.935-SB of 2002

                                      Date of Decision: 16 - 5 - 2011



Ashok                                                   .....Appellant

                                v.

State of Haryana                                        .....Respondent



CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

                                ***

Present:     Mr.Manjeet Singh, Advocate
             for the appellant.

             Mr.Anoop Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

                                ***

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Appellant Ashok was convicted for offence under Section 25 of

the Arms Act by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Rohtak

vide judgment dated 4.5.2002 and vide a separate order dated 6.5.2002 was

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine

of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to undergo further

rigorous imprisonment for two months.

Case set up by the prosecution is that on 18.7.1997, ASI Badan

Singh, Investigating Officer sent a ruqa Ex.PA, on the basis of which formal

FIR Ex.PA/1 was registered. In the ruqa, it was stated that on 18.7.1997,

ASI Badan Singh PW6 was a member of the police party headed by
Crl. Appeal No.935-SB of 2002 [2]

Inspector Ramphal. They had gone in connection with investigation of

another case and when they reached back near Harkishan Memorial Public

School, Sonepat Road, Rohtak, they received a secret information that five

boys had gathered in a house situated in Sectors 2,3,4, HUDA, Rohtak and

were planning to commit a dacoity at the house of Kaka Goldsmith. The

police party was divided into four raiding teams and proceeded towards the

stated place. They stopped their vehicles at some distance from the house.

On seeing the police party, the accused made an attempt to run away from

the spot but the accused Ashok was apprehended. On his personal search,

one loaded pistol of .315 bore was recovered and from the right side dub of

his pant, one live cartridge was recovered.

The above-said FIR was investigated. After the sanction for

prosecution was granted, the accused was sent for trial.

Prosecution examined Inspector Ram Kumar as PW1, who

proved preparation of report under section 173 Cr.P.C.

Same Singh PW2 on receipt of ruqa Ex.PA had registered

formal FIR Ex.PA/1.

HC Sat Pal, Armourer who appeared as PW3 had tested the

pistol and had reported that the same was in a good working condition. He

also tested cartridges Exs.P2 and P3, which were recovered from the

appellant. This witness proved his report Ex.PB/1.

PW6 ASI Badan Singh proved recovery of the weapon.

Constable Balwan Singh PW6 was the witness to the recovery

and had also attested the recovery memo.

Ram Niwas Gupta, Reader to the District Magistrate PW5

proved the sanction order Ex.PC for prosecution of the accused.

Crl. Appeal No.935-SB of 2002 [3]

Thereafter statement of the accused was recorded under Section

313 Cr.P.C. and all incriminating circumstances were put to him. He denied

the same and pleaded innocence.

In the present case, the police party had conducted the raid after

a secret information was received. The secret information was received

near a school at Sonepat Road, Rohtak. Besides there being a sufficient

time for the police party and the place where secret information was

received, being a thoroughfare, no independent witness was associated.

Non-examination of any independent witness in the facts and circumstances

of the present case will be fatal, when this Court has given no credence to

the prosecution version that the accused had assembled and were planning

to commit dacoity. A connected appeal filed by the accused viz. Criminal

Appeal No.932-SB of 2002 has been accepted by this Court vide a separate

order of even date. Hence, this Court extends benefit of doubt to the

appellant.

Consequently, the present appeal is accepted and the appellant

is acquitted of the charge for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act.

( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
May 16, 2011. JUDGE

RC