SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant by the learned Designated court, Bhiwani at Hissar on 6/2/1988 in Sessions Trial No. 49 of 1987 are under challenge.

(2.) Mr. K. T. S. Tuisi, learned Senior Counsel has appeared for Appellant 1 Sukhbir Singh and Mr. Som Raj Dutta, learned Senior Counsel has appeared for the remaining appellants. The appellant Sukhbir Singh has been convicted by the learned Designated court under Section 302 and Section 307 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. The other appellants have also been convicted under Section 302 and Section 307 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. Although the said appellants have been convicted under the Arms Act, but no separate sentence has been passed for such offence.

(3.) Mr. Tulsi has submitted that initially the appellants were also charged for the offence under Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as TADA). The learned Designated court thereafter assumed jurisdiction and proceeded with the trial. Considering the materials on record, the learned Designated Judge inter alia came to the finding that no case for an offence under TADA had been made out. Therefore, an order was passed by the learned Designated Judge on 19-12-1987 that the case should be transferred to the appropriate criminal court for the trial of the said criminal case. In basing the said order of 19-12-1987, the learned Judge, Designated court had relied on a full bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana High court in Bimal Kaur Khalsa case. It appears that an appeal was taken to this court against the said full bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana High court in Bimal Khalsa case and it appears that an interim order of stay was granted by this court. In view of the said order of stay, the case was again referred back before the learned Designated Judge for trial on merits.