LAWS(PAT)-2002-1-124

JAI PRAKASH CHAMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 21, 2002
JAI PRAKASH, CHAMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from jail. The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 25(1-A) of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 31-1-1989 at about 3 p.m. a raiding party went to Village Kutkuri within Rafiganj police station for apprehending appellant Jai Prakash Chamar of the said village as he was involved in a few cases of murder, dacoity and extremists activities in the area and was avoiding arrest. The raiding party consisting of 42 Security men of the 95 Batalian of Border Security Force and Platoon Commander proceeded to the house . It has been further alleged that when the Police Officers and members of the Border Security Force were at some distance from the house of the appellant, Jai Prakash Chamar, two persons were seen fleeing towards north west after scaling over the compound wall of his house and one person fled away towards east. The persons fleeing away towards north west were chased and overpowered in a field situated at a distance of about 1 km. It has been further alleged that A.S.I. caught hold of appellant Jai Prakash Chamar while one member of the Border Security Force overpowered the other accused who disclosed his identity as Sheo Prasad Rawani . From the possession of appellant Jai Praksh Chamar a country made sten-gun, a belt containing 19 live and one used cartridges and a bag containing certain literature including the literature of M.C.C. were recovered. These articles were seized and a seizure list was prepared. Thereafter an F.I.R. was lodged. The police started investigation and after completion of investigations the police submitted charge sheet. Thereafter the cognizance was taken and finally the trial concluded with the result as indicated above. Hence this appeal.

(3.) The appellant pleaded not guilty and has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of his enemy.