BALLI @ DAULAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 has been preferred by the accused against his conviction and sentence recorded vide judgment dated 16th August 2004 in Sessions Case No. 78/2003 by the Special Judge (Under M.P. Dakoity Avam Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adiniyam 1981, hereafter referred as the Adhiniyam) Shivpuri, holding thereby him a guilty for commission of offence under Section 25(1-B) (a) of the Arms Act read with Section 11/13 of the said Adhiniyam and sentencing to suffer three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/- with further default punishment of one month's R.I.

(2.) In brief, the prosecution version is that on 27th March 2003 P.N. Paul, Assistant Sub Inspector Police Outpost Sunari, got a secret information from informer that absconded dacoit Nanhe Singh, Makhan Singh and Balli @ Daulat Singh (present appellant) by hiding themselves near Papredu Math were making preparations to commit dacoity. He lodged the secret information in Enty no. 440 of Daily diary register (Roznamcha) of outpost and then informed through wireless massage to his superior officer K.K. Dixit the then In-charge of Police Station Karera. On reaching of police force alongwith K.K. Dixit In-charge of the Police Station Karera, they arranged a raid on the spot and caught hold of the accused involved in illegal criminal activities. The accused were arrested on the spot by arrest memos (Ex.P/10, 12 and 14) with illegal firearms and ammunitions by seizure memos vide Ex.P/9, P/11 and P/13. One 12 bore county-made pistol with two live cartridges were seized from accused Balli @ Daulat Singh. After arrest of accused and seizure of firearms on the spot, the police force alongwith ASI P.N. Paul and K.K. Dixit In-charge of the Police Station Karera returned back to Police Station Karera. They registered their returning by Entry No. 1310 in the Daily dairy register (Roznamcha). Thereafter by FIR (Ex.P/15), the crime No. 111/2003 was registered. The investigation was set in motion. The seized firearms were examined by the head Constable Armorer posted in the Reserve Line Shivpuri.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused submitted that the case of the present appellant is similar to other co-accused whose appeal (526/2004) stands decided by the judgment dated 22nd September 2010. He therefore prayed that the conviction of the present accused may be maintained for the alleged offence like other co-convicts and benefited by reducing sentence to the imprisonment already undergone like other accused namely, Nanhe Singh who had already undergone two years, one month and twenty three days. He therefore prayed that the present appeal may also be decided in terms of the same observations/directions.