Satnam Singh @ Mohli vs State of Punjab

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—Present appeal has been filed by Satnam Singh @ Mohli. He was tried in a case FIR No. 48 dated 22.03.2002 registered at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi u/s 25/54/59 of Arms Act (hereinafter referred to as, ''the Act'').

The Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Kapurthala vide its judgment dated 20th May, 2003 held the appellant guilty of an offence punishable u/s 25 of the Act for having in his possession a country-made 12 bore pistol along with three live cartridges. The Court vide a separate order of even date sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 1/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

The present appeal assails the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

Prosecution case against the appellant emerges in the statement made by ASI Parkash Singh PW-2. He stated that on 22nd March, 2002 he was posted as an In-charge, Police Post Talwandi Chaudharian. On that day, he along with other police officials was present at village Dandupur in connection with the investigation of a case FIR No. 43 dated 15.03.2002 registered at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi under Sections 307, 392, 34 IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act. Satish Kumar Chura ex-MC arrived and was made to join the police party. One scooter bearing registration number PCR-1554, was spotted coming from the side of Mundi and was stopped for general checking. Three persons were sitting on the scooter. The police party asked the names and whereabouts of those persons. One of them disclosed his name as Sukhdev Singh @ Buta son of Puran Singh, resident of Basti Saidpur. He was wanted by the police in the above said FIR No. 43 dated 15.03.2002. The remaining two persons disclosed their names as Satnam Singh and Baljinder Singh @ Theka. Personal search of the accused was carried and from Satnam Singh one country made .12 bore pistol was recovered. Same was taken into possession along with three live cartridges. The pistol was exhibited as Ex.P1 and the live cartridges as Ex.P2 to Ex.P4. Rough sketch of the pistol was drawn as Ex.PB. Ruqa Ex.PF was sent to the Police Station, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PF/1 was registered.

HC Inderjit Singh PW-3, who was a member of the police party, corroborated the testimony of ASI Parkash Singh PW-2.

HC Manmohan Singh PW-1 was posted as an Armourer. He stated that one country made pistol of .15 bore was taken from the parcel and the same was in working condition.

Mukhtiar Singh, Reader to District Magistrate, Kapurthala appeared as PW-4 and proved sanction PW4/A granted by the District Magistrate, Kapurthala to prosecute the appellant.

Satish Kumar Chura, who was joined as an independent witness, was given up as won over by the Additional Public Prosecutor on 9th May, 2003.

A perusal of ruqa Ex.PF reveals that a country made pistol of .315 bore was recovered from the appellant, whereas ASI Parkash Singh PW-2 stated that a country made pistol of .12 bore was recovered and HC Inderjit Singh PW-3 is silent about the description and bore of the weapon. The rough sketch Ex.PB of the weapon also shows that the same is a .315 bore country made pistol. The recovery memo Ex.PD also describes the weapon to be a .315 bore country made pistol. Prosecution has not clarified as to whether ASI Parkash Singh PW-2 had wrongly or inadvertently stated the weapon to be a .12 bore country made pistol. In these circumstances, non examination of the independent person assumes importance. In cross-examination, ASI Parkash Singh PW-2 stated that on 22nd March, 2002 he was leading a police party and two pistols were recovered, one was taken into possession by him from accused Satnam Singh while the other was taken into possession by ASI Iqbal Singh from accused Baljinder Singh. ASI Parkash Singh PW-2 stated that Satish Kumar Chura ex-MC was joined as an independent witness. HC Inderjit Singh PW-3 in his examination in chief also stated that Satish Kumar Chura ex-MC was joined by the investigating officer as an independent witness, whereas in cross-examination he stated that they remained at the spot for about four hours and tried to join independent witness but no one was available.

Taking the entire conspectus of the case into consideration, this Court is of the view that in the present case, non examination of the independent witness can be construed to the detriment of prosecution. Having effected recovery of a .315 bore country made pistol, ASI Parkash Singh PW-2 has stated that the weapon of offence recovered was a .12 bore country made pistol. This discrepancy cannot be reconciled with the recovery. Hence, benefit of doubt is granted to the appellant.

Consequently, present appeal is accepted. Conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant is set aside and he is acquitted of the charges.