RAKESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Rakesh along with his four accomplice was booked under Sections 148/307/149 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, vide FIR No.76 dated 18.8.2001 at Police Station Bound Kalan, falling in District Bhiwani. Out of them, one Kalu (accused) was declared as Proclaimed Offender, whereas three others, namely, Sant, Lalit Kumar and Yogesh were acquitted and the appellant Rakesh alone, though, was acquitted under Sections 148,307 and 149 IPC, but was held guilty under section 25 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to remain in custody from 03.01.2002 to 17.04.2004, i.e., the period for which he had already undergone vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.01.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bhiwani.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant contended that no independent witness was associated at the time of recording of alleged confessional statement, Ex.PS or effecting recovery of alleged country made pistol .12 bore vide recovery memo Ex.PS/3 from the conscious possession of the appellant and thus, the same is doubtful. Further, when the plea of the prosecution with regard to the main offence is not believed by the trial court and the appellant has been acquitted under sections 148, 307 and 149 IPC, in that eventuality, he could not have been convicted under section 25 of the Arms Act. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon the decision rendered in Ashwani Kumar @ Babbi and others v. The State of Punjab, 1999 (1) CLJ (Criminal) 215.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful considerations to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned State counsel.