WARIYAMSINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, hereinafter referred to as TADA, is directed against the judgment dated 10th January, 1994 passed by the Designated Judge (Sessions Judge) Pilibhit in Special Case No.17 of 1992. By the impugned judgment the appellants have been convicted under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 3 and 4 of TADA. For the offence under Section 120B, IPC, a sentence of life imprisonment has been passed against each of the accused and sentence of life imprisonment has also been passed against each of the accused under Section 3 of TADA. For the offence under Section 4 of TADA, each of the accused has been sentenced to suffer five years' rigorous imprisonments and also a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, one year's rigorous imprisonment. . The said special case No.17/92 was instituted against the appellants after obtaining necessary sanction from the competent authority in respect of an incident which had taken place on 17-4-1990 at 10 P.M.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that PW-1 Kashmir Singh, his son Balkar and other members of the family were sitting in their house and the three accused together with Balwinder Singh, since deceased, came there and after accusing Kashmir Singh and members of the family, the accused opened fire hitting Kashmir Singh on his leg. Balkar Singh the son of Kashmir Singh and other members of the family present there also opened fire and the said son chased the accused up to 100-150 yards by flashing torch. But the said Balkar Singh was hit by the bullet fired by Balwinder Singh which caused his death. Later on, Balwinder Singh also died in an encounter with police and the remaining three accused were prosecuted before the Designated Court.

(3.) According to the prosecution case, all the three accused made confessional statements before the Superintendent of Police and such confessional statements are Exhibits 26.27 and 28. The Superintendent of Police as PW-8 and he specifically stated that the accused made voluntary statements; they were given time to reflect before making such voluntary statements and it was ensured by him when there was no other person present when such confessional statements were made. The accused persons were also warned by the Superintendent of Police that the confessional statements would be used against them and they might be convicted for such confessional statements.