LALBAHADUR KESHI CHETRI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are three connected matters in the sense that the same party of Police and search witnesses raided the houses of the accused persons on the morning of 6 -3 -53 in a village and Incriminating articles, consisting of gun -powder, cartrides and unlicensed arms, to wit, a single barrelled muzzle loading gun, were alleged to have been recovered from the houses of the accused persons, and as such, on a report made by the C. I. D. Sub -Inspector, prosecution was sanctioned against the accused persons under Section 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act, and the accused petitioners were convicted by the trial Magistrate, who unsuccessfully appealed to the Additional Sessions Judge.

(2.) THERE is particularly one point that was common to these cases as argued by the learned advocate for the petitioners arid it was that the search being irregular that is, not being in strict compliance with Section 103, Cr. P. C., no conviction could have been based on the basis of such an irregular search. It is because of this that I am giving one judgment to cover the three revision petitions. Of course, I propose to discuss the merits Of the cases separately later.

(3.) WHAT is really intended by Section 103, Cr. P.C. is that it should be strictly followed to the extent it is possible to ensure that, the incriminating articles were recovered as alleged and it leaves no room for doubt. The reason is that it forms a material part of the evidence that is necessary in matters of conviction for alleged possession of incriminating articles.