LAWS(JHAR)-2022-4-38

BANSI LAL HAZAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On April 07, 2022
Bansi Lal Hazam Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This revision application is directed against the judgment dtd. 29/8/2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.180 of 1998; whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 6/11/1998 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in G.R. No.2065 of 1992, T.R. No.655 of 1998; whereby the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Sec. 25(1-b)(a) and 26 (1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for one year for each of the above offence and directed to run both the sentences concurrently; has been affirmed and the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed .

(3.) The prosecution case in short is that on 1/6/1992 one Mr. R.N. Kunwar, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police along with other official posted at Bank More Police Station, while searching at about 1.00 P.M., a Tata Model 608 vehicle bearing No. WB-55-0322 was seen coming rashly. It was stopped by the police and the driver was asked to produce the papers of the vehicle. The driver took out the papers one by one from the rekine bag in suspicious condition. On suspicion the informant took the bag in his hand in which he found a rifle cartridge. After recovery of cartridge personal search of the body of the driver was made and a country made pistol was also recovered from his waist. The driver could not produce any legal paper for the possession of the said arm. Thereafter, arm and a cartridge were seized by the police and accordingly seizure list was prepared in presence of two independent witnesses. On the basis of aforesaid written report Bank More P.S. Case No.350/92 for the offence u/S 25(1-b)(a) and 26 (1) of the Arms Act was registered against the accused person and after investigation police submitted charge-sheet for the aforesaid Sec. . Accordingly, charge was framed against the petitioner for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and finally the petitioner has been convicted.