Ram Mehar vs State of Haryana

Mehtab S. Gill, J.

In narrow compass, the prosecution story is that the petitioner was apprehended on September 2, 1984 and one countrymade pistol and one live cartridge was recovered from him. The same were taken into possession. The petitioner could not produce any licence or permit. He was accordingly challaned and sent up for trial.

After the conclusion of trial, the petitioner was convicted under Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to undergo four months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/ and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month''s rigorous imprisonment. His appeal against the conviction and sentence also failed. Therefore, he is before this Court.

The counsel for the petitioner has made an endeavour to assail the prosecution story on the ground that the case property was not exhibited, secondly the Pistol contained slips not only of F.I.R. No. 204 of 1984 but also of F.I.R. 418 of 1985 of Police Station Sadar, Sonepat, and as such it was the case property of some other case and thirdly that the only independent witness Daya Ram has not been examined by the prosecution. He wanted me to draw an interference that the case against the petitioner is false.

All these points raised by the counsel for the petitioner have been discussed and met with by the Courts below which have given valid reasons to reject the same. I fully concur with the conclusions arrived at by the Courts below and do not want to interfere with the same. Therefore, the conviction of the petitioner is confirmed.

So far as the sentence awarded to the petitioner is concerned, I am aware of the fact that the petitioner is undergoing the agony and harassment of these proceedings for the last about 15 years. The petitioner in his statement recorded on the point of sentence stated that he was not a previous convict; that he was married having three children and that there was no other earning member in his family as he lived separately from his father. After weighing the considerations already noticed by me and the fact that he is to earn a living for himself and for his family members and for those dependent on him, I feel that it would meet the ends of justice if I reduce the sentence of imprisonment to that already undergone by him. JUDGMENTed accordingly. However, the sentence of fine is maintained.

This Criminal Revision is disposed of in the manner indicated above.

The petitioner shall stands discharged from his bail bonds and surety bonds, if any.

JUDGMENT accordingly.