Jharkhand High Court
Premus Kullu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 140 of 2016
-------
1. Premus Kullu
2. Telesphore Kujur
3. Kuldeep Kerketta ...... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... .... Opp. Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
--------
For the Petitioners : Mr. K. S. Nanda, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. P. K. Chatterjee, Spl. P. P.
--------
10/ Dated 14.08.2023
Heard the parties.
The petitioners have filed this application against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 18.12.2015, passed by Sri Ram Babu
Gupta, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega in Cr. Appeal No.36/2014,
whereby and wherein, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega dismissed the
appeal of the petitioners and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 03.06.2014 passed by Sri Vikram Anand, learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st class, Simdega in connection with Kersai P.S. Case No.10/2012
corresponding to G.R No.263/2012, holding the petitioners guilty of offences
under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act and thereby, sentencing them to
undergo R.I for two years alongwith a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under
Sections 25 (1-B)a of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine, they were
further directed to undergo S.I for three months. The petitioners were further
directed to undergo R.I for two years alongwith a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the
offence under Sections 26/35 of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine,
they were further directed to undergo S.I for three months. Both the sentences
were ordered to run concurrently.
The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of self statement of the
informant, S.I., Pram Payare Lal Xalxo of Kersai Police Station, alleging therein
that on 15.06.2012 at about 5:00 P.M, he received information from the
Superintendent of Police, Simdega that some extremists had assembled at Jaratand
forest. On the basis of this information, he rushed to the place of occurrence and
apprehended the petitioners along-with other co-accused persons. On search, a
loaded country-made pistol and live cartridges of 7.62 bore were recovered from
the possession of petitioner No.1 Premus Kullu.
In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and
documentary evidence. On the basis of the evidence available on record, both the
learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court have come to a concurrent
finding regarding the guilt of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court
towards the statement of Anil Kumar Singh, P.W.5 who was examined as an
expert. This witness had stated that the seized country-made pistol was not in
working condition. In his cross-examination, he has stated that his opinion that the
recovered cartridges were in working condition was on the basis of physical
examination of the cartridges.
The report of this witness is also on record which was marked as Exhibit-5.
It appears that the country-made pistol was not in working condition. Though it
has been reported that the seized cartridges were in working condition, but there is
specific statement of Anil Kumar Singh P.W.5 that he had given his report by
physically inspecting the cartridges.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it is apparent that the seized
country-made pistol was not in working condition and the fact that the seized
cartridges were in working condition has not been proved.
In view of the aforesaid facts, I come to the finding that both the
learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court have come to an erroneous
finding regarding the guilt of the petitioners for the offence under Sections 25 (1-
B)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act.
Accordingly, this revision application is allowed. The judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Court below is set aside.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
BS/ (Ambuj Nath, J.)
