LAWS(KER)-2016-3-248

ABDUL KHADER Vs. CESTAT, BANGALORE

Decided On March 09, 2016
ABDUL KHADER Appellant
V/S
CESTAT, Bangalore Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -By Judgment and Order on Sentence, both dated 29-09- 2014, in Sessions Trial Case No.106 of 2014, the Learned Sessions Judge, Special Division - I, East Sikkim at Gangtok, convicted the Appellant and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 (One thousand) only, under Sec. 5(b) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (for short "E.S. Act"), read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), with a default clause of imprisonment. Aggrieved by both, this Appeal has been preferred.

(2.) P.W.3 Sangay Tshering Bhutia, a Constable at the Melli Check Post, South Sikkim, lodged a written Complaint Exhibit 2, on 06- 02-2011, at around 1450 hours, to the effect that while he was on duty from 1200 hours to 1600 hours, at the Melli Check Post, along with Constable Chatur Singh Subba P.W.6 and Home Guard Bir Bahadur Rai, P.W.7, a motor cycle bearing registration no.WB 74 C 7154 driven by the Appellant, a resident of Sumbuk, South Sikkim, reached the Check Post at around 1430 hours. P.W.6 checked the army coloured bag (M.O.II) of the Appellant where sixteen numbers of detonators (M.O.III and M.O.VI) were found. Accordingly, a Melli P.S. Case was registered on the same date against the Appellant under Sec. 5 of the E.S. Act and investigation taken up by P.W.15 the Investigating Officer (for short "I.O."). Investigation revealed that on the morning of 06-02-2011 the Appellant had gone to the LANCO Energy Private Limited, Teesta Stage VI, 500 MV, Majitar, Rangpo, to supply meat where he met the accused, Deepak Rai, a Foreman of the Project and took sixteen numbers of detonators from him. When a search was conducted by the Police at the Melli Check Post the detonators were found hidden in his hand bag. At the Project premises Deepak Rai was found to be absconding. On completion of investigation, Charge-sheet was submitted against the Appellant and the absconding accused Deepak Rai under Sec. 5 of the E.S. Act read with Sec. 34 of the IPC.

(3.) In the Sessions Court, Charge was framed against the Appellant under Sec. 5 of the E.S. Act read with Sec. 34 of the Penal Code and on a plea of "not guilty", Prosecution witnesses were examined, the evidence on record duly considered and the impugned Judgment and Order on Sentence pronounced.