RANJIT SINGH ALIAS BAU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Crl. Appeal has been filed by Shri Ranjit Singh alias Bau son of Karnail Singh, resident of village Killa Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Amritsar. This very appellant was also involved in a murder case bearing FIR No. 253 registered on 4.9.1997 in Police-Station Patti, under Sec. 302, 323, 148, 149 Indian Penal Code and 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act regarding the murder of Kashmir Singh and also for causing injuries to Joginder Singh. In the main case, it was alleged that Shri Ranjit Singh present appellant was carrying a double barrel gun and he used the same for unlawful purpose for committing the murder of Shri Kashmir Singh.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that Shri Ranjit Singh appellant was wanted in the main murder case referred to above and he was arrested by the Thanedar Shri Rachhpal Singh and was interrogated about the weapon of offence on 14.9.1997 and on interrogation he made disclosure statement that he had kept concealed one 12 bore gun in the heap of Toori lying in his varandah in his residential house and he offered to get the same recovered. His disclosure statement Ex. PA was recorded and in pursuant of the same the accused got recovered gun Ex. P.1 from the disclosed place along with four live cartridges of the same bore Exs. P.2 Ex. P.S. The gun was dismantled into three parts and thereafter the gun and the cartridges were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PB after making it into a parcel duly seated with the seal mark RS. The seal after use was handed over to ASI Amarjit Singh. S.I. Rachhpal Singh prepared rough site plan Ex. PC of the place of recovery and arrested the accused in this case. The case property was deposited by S.I. Rachhpal Singh with the MHC with seals intact. Sanction of the District Magistrate Ex. PD for prosecution of the accused was obtained and after completion of the investigation, the accused was challaned. As the main case was committed to the Court of Session, resultantly the case under the Arms Act, was also committed to the Court of Session.

(3.) The charge under Sec. 25 of the Arms Act, was framed against the appellant which was read over and explained to him and he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.