CHHOTEY LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by Chhotey Lal who has been convicted under Section 19(f) of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Chhotey Lal stood his trial before the learned Sessions Judge of Pilibhit along with three other persons, Bam Bharosey Lal, Rajendra Kumar and Avadh Behari Lal for offences punishable under Sections 304/34 and Section 394, I.P.C. The facts on which the aforementioned charges were made against the four accused who stood a joint trial, before the Sessions Judge of Pilibhit were that they killed one Lala Nanhey Mal on 3-7-1950, when he was going to the railway station in the small hours of the morning to catch a train for Bareilly. Lala Nanhey Mal had on his person a large sum of money and with him there was another man named Ramesh Chandra who also carried a part of the money of Lala Nanhey Mal. These two people were surprised by some persons, according to the prosecution by the four accused, and thereafter Nanhey Mal was stabbed and Ramesh Chandra was robbed. The prosecution tried to prove the charges against all the accused, taut they were unable to satisfy the trial Judge with regard to any of the charges save the one under Section 19(f) of the Arms Act against the appellant before me. As a consequence of the findings arrived at by the trial Judge all the four accused were acquitted of the charges under Sections 302/34 & Section 394, I.P.C. The learned Judge, however, has as already mentioned, convicted the appellant under Section 19 (f) of the Arms Act because in his view the evidence in the case established the fact that the appellant possessed a country made pistol.

(3.) After the outrage on Nanhey Mal the police got busy tracing the culprits and it appears that Chhotey Lal, the appellant, was one of the suspects in the crime. Chhotey Lal was taken into police custody, though not actually arrested, and he was subjected to an examination by the investigating officer. It appears that the investigating officer expected Chhotey Lal to make some startling revelations and he, therefore, had a Tahsildar. Magistrate called to hear these. The accused made a statement before the Tahsildar Magistrate, namely, Sri Kailash Chandra and the police officer to the effect that he had dropped a pistol in a ditch and that he was going to take the party to the ditch so that the pistol may be discovered therefrom. The pistol was as a consequence of the statement actually discovered before the Tahsildar Magistrate and a few other witnesses as also in the presence of the investigating Officer in whose custody the accused apparently was at that time.