KARAMJIT SINGH Vs. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Karamjit Singh has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 2-2-1996 of the Designated Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No. 140 of 1991, by which he was convicted under Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act and was sentenced to 5 years R.I. thereunder and was further convicted under Sections 3 and 5 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter referred to as "the TADA") and was sentenced to 5 years R.I. and 5 years and six months R.I. respectively under the two counts. The sentences awarded to him were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant Karamjit Singh at the relevant time was working as driver in Delhi Police and was residing with his wife in quarter No. B-12 in Police Station Mehrauli, which had been allotted to his father-in-law, Didar Singh, who was also a constable. A secret information was received that the appellant was involved in terrorist activities and that he was allowing the terrorists to stay in his residence and had also in his possession some explosive material. It was accordingly decided to conduct a search of his residential premises and in that connection a raiding party was organised by ACP, Shakti Singh of the CSS Branch, Operation Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi. Shakti Singh, ACP along with number of police personnel including R.D. Pandey, Inspector, Pratap Singh, Inspector and Rajinder Prasad, Sub-Inspector proceeded from their office at Lodhi Colony for appellants quarter in P.S. Mehrauli at 8.30 a.m. on 8-11-1990. The quarter was locked from outside and, therefore, they kept a secret watch. At about 11.30 a.m., the appellant along with his wife arrived there on a scooter. The raiding party disclosed their identity to the appellant, who tried to run away but he was overpowered and was asked to open the door of the house. The appellant then opened the lock and the members of the raiding party entered the same. A steel box was found kept in the north side of the bedroom, which was also locked. The box was opened by the appellant and a number of incriminating articles like explosive material in two separate containers weighing 1.60 kg. and 1.80 kg., four detonators fitted with electric wires, time piece fitted with electrical wires in the shape of a fixed timer, one pocket watch having electrical wires which was also a timer, one ampere meter tester, one pair of magnets, soldering wire, splinters weighing 1.150 kgs., nut and bolts, wrenches and screw drivers, etc. were found stored therein. The recovered articles were sealed on the spot. Thereafter a Rukka was sent to the Police Station, Mehrauli through PW2 Naresh and on the basis thereof PW1 Shashi Bala, who was on duty, registered a case against the appellant being FIR No. 298 of 1990 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA. The appellant was produced in Court on the next day, where he was taken on police remand. The appellant also give a disclosure statement. After investigation of the case, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant on the basis of which cognizance was taken by the Designated Court. The learned Additional Sessions Judge (Designated Court No. 1), New Delhi, framed charges under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 3 and 5 of TADA on 12-5-1993. The prosecution in support of its case examined 14 witnesses and filed some documentary evidence. The appellant in his statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case. He stated that the quarter was not in his possession and he was not residing there nor any incriminating articles were recovered from his possession. He also denied to have made any disclosure statement. He further submitted that he had no association with any terrorist and had a clean service record while working as a driver with Delhi Police. He examined one witness, namely, DW1, Mukhtiar Singh in his defence. The Designated Court, after appraisal of evidence on record, believed the case of the prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned earlier.

(3.) Before examining the contentions raised by Shri K. B. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the appellant, it will be proper to briefly notice the evidence which has been adduced by the prosecution to sustain the charge levelled against the appellant. PW11 Pratap Singh has deposed that he was posted as Inspector in CSS Branch, Operation Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi, on 8-11-1990. On that day, a raid was organised by ACP, Shakti Singh, at the residence of the appellant Karamjit Singh, who was living in quarter No. B-12 of P. S. Meharauli, as a secret information had been received that he was having explosives in his possession and was helping the terrorists by allowing them to stay at this residence. At about 8.30 a.m., the police party headed by ACP, Shakti Singh, started from Lodhi Colony office and went to Mehrauli. They kept a secret watch at the house of the appellant, which was locked. At about 11.30 a.m., the appellant came there along with his wife on a scooter. He was stopped and the raiding party disclosed their identity on which he tried to run away but he was overpowered. The appellant was asked to open the lock of his house, which he did and thereafter all of them went inside the house and found that a box was kept in the bedroom which was also locked. On the asking of ACP Shakti Singh, the appellant opened the lock of the box and it was found that a number of articles like explosives, detonators fitted with electric wires, time piece, pocket watch, wrenches, wires, soldering material, splinters, etc., details of have been given earlier were found there. The articles were sealed on the spot and a site plan was prepared. The witness has further deposed that thereafter he prepared a Rukka and after signing the same sent it to P. S. Mehrauli through PW2 Naresh, Constable, for registration of the case. The appellant also made disclosure statements on 9-11-1990 and 10-11-1990. After completing investigation, he sent papers for obtaining sanction from the concerned officers and after the same had been granted charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant in Court. PW. 9 R. D. Pandey, Inspector, and PW10 Rajinder Prasad, Sub-Inspector were also posed in CSS Branch, Operation Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi on 8-11-1990 and they were members of the raiding party headed by ACP Shakti Singh and they had also gone to the residence of the appellant. These two persons have given exactly similar statements as that of PW11 Pratap Singh and have deposed about the opening of the lock of the house and the opening of the lock of the box by the appellant and also recovery of the incriminating articles from there.