CHUNTA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN both the appeals challenge being to the decision rendered in ST. No. 152/83 by the Special Judge, Chhatarpur, they were heard analogously and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.5.83 after getting some reliable information the Sub -Inspector (PW.5) and the Head -constable (PW.2) alongwith Pitare (PW.1) and Hardas (PW.4) went to Shyam Ke Khoda. There they saw the accused persons had hidden themselves being armed with weaspons. After due efforts the present accused persons and some others were apprehended. It is the further case of the prosecution that the accused persons were armed with weapons and preparing for committing dacoity in the house of one Mohan Lodhi. Taking advantage of the darkness accused -Rajau and Malik Singh escaped and, therefore, they could not be apprehended immediately. Later on, they were taken to custody. After their arrest in presence of Pitare (PW.1) and Hardas (PW.4) a 12 bore Katta and two live catridges from the Mutka and one pistol from the accused Chunta were seized. The said accused persons had no licence to possess the said arms. From Maiyadin one 'lathi' and from Lakhan one 'ballam' were seized. The concerned Sub -Inspector prepared 'Dehati Nalish' at the spot. On the next day i.e. on 29.5.83 he prepared the spot map in presence of the witnesses. After completing all other formalities the accused were sent up for trial under sections 399 and 402 read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and section 11 of the M.P. Dacoity &Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981. As the offences under sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act were registered against the accused persons the prosecution obtained due sanction from the District Magistrate.

(3.) THE prosecution, to substantiate the charge against the accused persons, examined five witnesses and brought number of documents on record. The defence chose not to adduce any evidence.