STATE OF H.P. Vs. IMTIAZ AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three accused, namely, Imtiaz Ahmad, Ishtiaz Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad were tried for the charges framed against them under Sections 467,468,473 IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Accused Ishtiaz Ahmad died during the pendency of the present appeal.

(2.) Prosecution case, as put up, has been that on 18.9.1982, Shri Jaswir Singh, Inspector of Police, Nahan, got a secret information that accused Imtiaz Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad were dealing in the sale of weapons and explosives unauthorisedly and without licence. These three accused persons were the partners of a firm named M/S Nazir Ahmad and Ishtiaz Ahmad and in the year 1979, they were alleged to have forged arms licence. According to prosecution, the licence bearing No. 3336 -N/74 which had been issued in the name of the accused persons for possessing one N.P. 22 Bore Rifle was alleged to have been forged by adding the description of 32 Bore Revolver bearing No. 32491 and also by affixing the seal of the District Magistrate, Sirmaur with intent to make other licence that the 32 Bore Revolver was having a genuine licence and the same was a genuine arm. The accused were also alleged to have then made an endorsement regarding the sale of this 32 Bore Revolver on the licence of Harminder Singh, PW, of Patiala at Nahan. Accused were also alleged to have committed forgery by issuing receipt to M/S Himalayan Arms, Gandhi Road, Dehradun, with respect to unauthorised arm pertaining to 32 Bore Revolver bearing No. 32491 and it was done with the intention that it would be used for the purpose of cheating those individuals and concerns respectively. Further case, as put up, has been that the accused persons prepared a seal of the District Magistrate, Sirmaur, with the intention that the same shall be used for the purpose of committing forgery, that is, to forget licence No. 32491. On the personal search of the house of the accused persons, 16 Bore double barrel gun was recovered without having any licence. The 32 bore revolver alleged to have sold by the accused was also in their possession, without there being any licence.

(3.) The trial Magistrate acquitted the accused persons after recording the evidence in this particular behalf.