ABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who was the sole accused in S. C. No. 397 of 1999 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Fast Track (Ad hoc-I), Kozhikode, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him by the said court for an offence punishable under Section 9 (B) (1) (b) r/w Section 5 of the Explosives Act, 1884.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: on 23-5-1994, at about 4 p. m. , P. W. 1, the Circle Inspector of Police, balussery received a credible secret information to the effect that explosive substances were unlawfully stocked in Chembottu house bearing building No. 1/140 of Naduvannur Panchayat belonging to the accused. Immediately after preparing a search memorandum, P. W. 1 along with his police party including the A. S. I. (P. W. 2), proceeded to the said house and reached there at 5 p. m. The house was found locked. The house was opened using a key handed over by P. W. 5 (Ibrahim), the elder brother of the accused. On searching the house, 42 gelatin articles, 300 detonators, 35 rolls of safety fuses and 40 kgs. of diesel salt consisting of ammonium nitrate were found kept towards the western side of the kitchen room. The aforesaid explosive articles were seized under Ext. P-2 search list to which P. Ws. 3 and 4 affixed their signatures as independent witnesses. 4 sets of samples were taken from the gelatin sticks, ammonium nitrate, detonators and safety fuses. The samples were forwarded to the Chief Controller of Explosives, Emakulam for analysis through court. As per Ext. P-7 Certificate issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives the samples were found to be explosive substances. As per Ext. P-12 ownership certificate issued by the Secretary, Naduvannur Grama Panchayat, the accused was found to be the owner of the aforesaid house. Since the accused was found in possession of explosives in contravention of the rules made under Section 5 of the explosives Act, 1884, he has committed an offence punishable under section 9 (B) (1) (b) of the Explosives Act, 1884. Since the accused was also found to be knowingly in possession of the aforesaid explosive substances giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that he was not in possession of the same for any lawful object, he has committed an offence punishable under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

(3.) ON the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against him by the court below for the aforementioned offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 10 witnesses as P. Ws. 1 to 10 and got marked 13 documents as Exts. P-1 to P-13.