Judgment

Nanavati, J.-The appellant has been convicted by the Designated Court. Assam, in TADA Sessions Case No. 126/93, on his pleading guilty to the charge that on 22.10.91 in the notified area, he was found in possession of two guns and two cartridges which were intended to be used for carrying on terrorist and disruptive activities.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has challenged the conviction on the ground that the Designated Court wrongly construed the statement of the appellant as an admission of guilt.

3. The charge framed against the appellant was “That you on or about 22.10.91 kept concealed DBBL gun No. 7083 and 42250 with 12 Bore two cartridges (red in colour) without licence or authority for using the same in terrorist and disruptive activities and there by committed an offence u/s. 5 of TADA (P) Act.” After framing the charge, the ques­tion that was put to the appellant was that “on 22.10.91 Police/Mili­tary recovered from your Engar Khowa house SBBL Gun No. 7083 and SBBL Gun No. 42250 and 120 Bore Cartridge 2 Nos. led by you.”

4. To this question, the appellant replied as under:

“It was recovered from the house of other person which is situated at a distance of one a