BHUNESHWAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jyoti Prasad Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 15/9/2018 passed by Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh No.1, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Hazaribag in S.T. No. 291 of 2012, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sec. 25(1-B)a/ 26 of the Arms Act, Sec. 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sec. 17 of the CLA Act and has been sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years along with a fine of Rs.5000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 25(1-B)a of the Arms Act and in default in payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 months, RI for 7 years along with a fine of Rs.5000.00 for the offence under Sec. 26 of the Arms Act and in default in payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 months, RI for 10 years along with a fine of Rs.10000.00 for the offence under Sec. 3 of the Explosive Substances Act and in default in payment of fine to undergo SI for 6 months, RI for 10 years along with a fine of Rs.10000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 4 of the Explosive Substances Act and in default in payment of fine to undergo SI for 6 months, RI for a period of 6 months along with a fine of Rs.5000.00 for the offence under Sec. 17 of the CLA Act and in default in payment of fine to undergo SI for 1 month.

(3.) The prosecution case arises out of the self-statement of Anil Kumar 1 Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1343 of 2018 Singh recorded on 11/3/2010 in which it has been stated that a secret information was received by the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag that Bhuneshwar Mahto (appellant) a hardcore extremist has come to his house equipped with explosive substances in order to execute some devious plan. At this information two separate teams were constituted by the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag and the Superintendent of Police, Bokaro. It has been alleged that both the teams along with CRPF personnel reached village Sapmarwa and surrounded the house of Bhuneshwar Mahto. On entering the house Bhuneshwar Mahto was found sitting in the courtyard with a rifle kept on his thigh. He was overpowered and the rifle was seized. Based on the aforesaid allegations, Bishnugarh PS Case No. 33/10 was instituted against Bhuneshwar Mahto. On completion of investigation charge-sheet was submitted and after cognizance was taken the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as S.T. No. 291 of 2012. Charge was framed against the accused under Sec. 25(1-B)a/ 26 of the Arms Act, Sec. 3/ 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, Sec. 17 of the CLA Act and Sec. 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act which were read over and explained to the accused in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.