LAWS(P&H)-1952-6-2

STATE Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

Decided On June 23, 1952
STATE Appellant
V/S
MOHINDER SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal brought by the State against the order of acquittal of Mohinder Singh by the learned Sessions Judge dated 14-7-1950, allowing an appeal against the order of conviction passed by Mr. S. P. Jain, Magistrate 1st Class, who had convicted Mo-hinder Singh under section 19 (f), Arms Act, and imposed a sentence "of one year's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) MOHINDER Singh was arrested on 26-4-1950 in connection With a case of dacoity. On 9-5-1950, he made a statement to Assistant Sub Inspector Teja Singh of the Anti Dacoity Staff in which he stated "that he had concealed a pistol under a 'shisham' tree in Kang Mai and that he would point out the place and have it recovered". The Assistant Sub Inspector then took the accused, Gurdit Singh Lambardar and Dasondha Singh and in the presence of these two persons the accused took out the pistol Ex. P. 1 from inside the reeds. It was wrapped in a torn piece of cloth. The accused was'then tried under Section 19 (f), Arms Act, and although he was convicted by the Magistrate he was quitted by the Sessions Judge, as I have said above. The learned sessions Judge remarked in his judgment that it had not been proved that the pistol recovered at the instance of the accused "belonged to any one" and was stolen, nor is there evidence to prove that the police, had received information that the accused was keeping an unlicensed pistol and, therefore, there was no occasion for the police to interrogate the accused with regard to the pistol and if no interrogation was necessary the statement made to the police could not be said to be voluntarily made. He, therefore, disbelieved the story. The State has come up in appeal to this court.

(3.) ASSISTANT Sub Inspector Teja Singh as P. W. 3 has stated that he interrogated the accused and during the course of this interrogation the accused 'stated about the concealment of the pistol. The other witnesses relied upon by the prosecution are P. W. 1 Dasondha Singh and P. W. 2 gurdial Singh, P W. 1 Dasondha Singh deposed "the accused stated that he had kept buried a country-made pistol under the 'tahli' tree outside the village and that he could produce it by taking it out from there. The accused pointed out that place and dug out the pistol * * * and produced the same. " In his statement Gurdial Singh P. W. 2 has deposed that the accused stated that he had a pistol which he kept under a 'shisham' tree in Kang Mai. The statement of P. W. 3 assistant Sub Inspector Teja Singh is only this that the accused had said that he had concealed the pistol under a 'shisham' tree. From these statements it is quite clear that as a result of the statement of the accused a pistol which was licensed was recovered.