RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is revision under section 397/401 Crimial P.C. against the judgment dated 2.11.95 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.2 Sriganganagar camp at Suratgarh by which he dismissed the appeal No.46/95 filed by petitioner Ravinder Kumar against the judgment dated 13.2.95 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh in case No. 407/93, State Vs. Ravinder Kumar by which the convicted the petitioner for offence under section 25 of Arms Act for 11/2years Rl and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default to further undergo three months Rl.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts may be narrated as follows : On 11.1.93 Narsimharao and Ved Prakash. Who were IPS officers went to investigate Cr. Case No. 11/93 under section 279, 304-A Penal Code in the village of the petitioner. The Investigating Officer PW9 Om Prakash, who was the SHO of police station Suratgarh, was also with them. When they reached in ward No. 8 at the house of the petitioner, he received a secret message from a mukhbir that unauthorised arms were hidden in the house of the petitioner. The petitioner was not present. Two motbirs were called. The Investigating Officer Om Prakash alongwith motbirs went inside the house of the petitioner. Shutter of the garage was opened and search was made. A drum full of wheat was found wherein a 32 bore revolver was found hidden. A live cartridge was also loaded in the revolver. They were seized vide Ex.R/4 and were sealed. Then the same were sent to an armourer for examination who submitted report on the back of Ex.P./3 in portion E to F and put his signatures K to L. According to it the revolver was 32 bore. A live cartridge was also found. According to it the revolver was in working condition. Sanction was obtained from the District Magistrate, Ganganagar and challan was submitted before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh Distt. Sriganganagar. The petitioner denied the charge and claimed trial. Thereupon prosecution examined as many as in witnesses. Thereafter accused petitioner was examined under section 313 Cr.RC. He did not produce any evidence in defence but his defence was that a case was registered by the police with regard to the death of his wife under section 304-A IPC in which he could not have been arrested. In order to arrest him, he was roped in this case with the help of the brother of his deceased wife so that he may be behind the bars. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh after hearing the parties, convicted the petitioner under section 25 of Arms Act and sentenced him to 11/2years Rl with a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default to further undergo SI for three months. An appeal was preferred and the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Sriganganagar camp Suratgarh vide his judgment dated 2.11.95 maintained the conviction and sentence. Hence this revision.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that many illegalities are found in the case and that the learned lower courts have misread the evidence. The main and material illegalities pointed out by him are : (1) that there is misreading of evidence by both the courts, and (2) that no question was asked about the sanction Ex.R/3 to the accused petitioner. He has, therefore, prayed that the accused petitioner deserves acquittal.