STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMSWARUP RAMKISHOR SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of filing this Application under Section 378 (1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("the Code" for short), the Applicant State of Gujarat has prayed to grant leave to file Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 2010, which is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.7.2009 rendered in Sessions Case No. 124 of 2007 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Modasa, recording acquittal of the Respondentaccused ("the accused" for short) for the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

(2.) The prosecution case as disclosed in the FIR and unfolded during trial is that; 2.1 PSI G.V.Paderia on 25.4.2001 while he was in Himmatnagar Town Police Station, received a secret information to the effect that the accused in his go-down has stored explosive substances namely Detonators and Gelatin Detonators without any pass or permit. Upon receipt of such information, a raid was arranged and according to the prosecution case when the go-down of the accused was raided by PSI G.V.Paderia and other members of the raiding party, in presence of panchas, in all 236 Gelatin Detonators and 11 caps came to be seized in presence of the accused and upon demand of any license, pass or permit, nothing was presented by the accused. PSI G.V.Paderia reported the said incident in the police station and his FIR was registered. During the course of investigation, statements of members of the raiding party and other relevant witnesses were recorded. After obtaining due sanction from District Magistrate, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar, charge sheet came to be filed in the Court of learned JMFC, Modasa. Since the offence is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, learned JMFC, Modasa committed the case to the Sessions Court, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar, which was registered as Sessions Case No.124 of 2007 and the same was made over for trial to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha, camp at Modasa. 2.2 The trial Court framed charge against the accused to which he did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution has adduced its oral and documentary evidence. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and produced relevant documents detailed in paragraph 5 and 6 respectively in the impugned judgment and order. After the prosecution concluded its oral evidence, the trial Court recorded further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code and the accused in his further statement denied generally all the incriminating circumstances put to him by the trial Court and stated that he was falsely implicated in this case. After considering the evidence on record and the submissions advanced on behalf of both the sides, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt and ultimately recorded his acquittal, which has given rise to this State Appeal.

(3.) We have considered the submissions advanced by Mr. L.B.Dabhi, learned APP for the Applicant State of Gujarat, we have perused the impugned judgment and order so also the record and proceedings of Sessions Case No. 124 of 2007 called for by us from the trial Court vide order dated 5.8.2010. This Court has also undertaken a complete and comprehensive appreciation of all vital features of the case and the entire evidence on record with reference to broad and reasonable probabilities of the case.