GAURANGO PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This criminal revision application has been filed for setting aside the judgment dated 20.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2012, whereby the learned lower appellate court has been pleased to dismiss the appeal and uphold the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.06.2012 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in G.R. Case No. 114/2011. The learned trial court had convicted the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a/35 and under Section 26(i)/35 of the Arms Act and under Section 414 of Indian Penal Code and the petitioner was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years six months for offence under Section25(1-B)a/35 of Arms Act and fine of Rs. 1000/- and further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for conviction under Section 26(i)/35 Arms Act and further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for conviction under Section 414 of Indian Penal Code. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently. Arguments of the petitioner

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case, the petitioner has been convicted only on the ground of confessional statement of the co-accused and there is no material whatsoever against the petitioner apart from such statement. He has also submitted that in absence of any further evidence against the petitioner, the petitioner could not have been convicted in the present case. The learned counsel has also submitted that there has been no seizure or recovery from the possession of the present petitioner. He has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Suresh vs. State of Haryana, 2018 18 SCC 654) and has referred to Para-50 in support of the aforesaid submission. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in para-50 of the aforesaid judgment has held as follows: -