KARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-appellant Karnail Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') has challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 6.3.1995 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot, whereby he was held guilty for holding 12 bore pistol with two live cartridges without any licence, and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.200/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. However, this sentence was ordered to run concurrently with the sentence awarded to him in case FIR No.154 dated 16.12.1992, Police Station Baghapurana, under Sections 364, 302/34 IPC.

(2.) The allegations, in brief, are that during the investigation of the case FIR No.154 dated 16.12.1992, when the police party headed by ASI Sukhdev Singh was proceeding towards village Rajeana, the accused was apprehended and on his personal search, one country made 12 bore pistol along with two live cartridges was recovered, which were taken into possession by the Investigating Officer and a separate FIR No.158 dated 26.12.1992 was registered against him. On completion of the investigation, challan against the accused was presented in the Court. Crl. Appeal No. 178-SB of 1995 [2] The accused did not plead guilty to the charge and claimed trial. During trial, the prosecution examined HC Balwant Singh (PW1), ASI Sukhdev Singh (PW2), LC Jaswant Singh (PW3) and Tirath Ram, Jr. Assistant (PW4). When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him and pleaded his false implication in the case. He further explained as under :-

(3.) The testimony of ASI Sukhdev Singh (PW2) regarding time, place and manner of recovery of country made 12 bore pistol Ex.P1 taken into possession by him stands corroborated by HC Balwant Singh (PW1). Barring minor discrepancies, there is no such serious infirmity in their testimonies effecting the substratum of the prosecution case. It is a matter of common experience that minor discrepancies are bound to occur in the testimony of truthful witnesses. LC Jaswant Singh (PW3) Armourer proved its report by stating that the pistol was found in working condition. Tirath Ram, Jr. Assistant (PW4) in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda has proved the sanction Ex.PF given by the District Magistrate, Faridkot for prosecution of the accused. No plausible defence has been set up by the accused. He could not explain as to how pistol Ex.P1 happened to be in his custody.