The Appellant-accused has challenged the judgment and order of the learned 7th Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai in Sessions Case No.714 of 2008, under which he has been convicted of offence under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act 1908 (the Act) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 5 years, pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month.

2.The Appellant-accused has also been convicted under Rule 3 of the Air Craft (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) Rules, 2003, punishable under Section 10 of the Aircraft Act, 1934 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default, to suffer imprisonment for 1 month.

3.The accused is stated to be a national of State of Oman. He was admittedly in Mumbai and on 23.7.2008. When the incident took place he was to board the flight for Muscat. At about 16.50 hours his baggage was kept in the baggage machine at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Sahar, Mumbai. Several sutali bombs, anars, peacock crackers and other dangerous substances were found sealed in his baggage in two pairs of footwear (4 chapples) amongst clothes.

4.It is the prosecution case that those are explosive substances and were dangerous to life and property and would cause serious injury to them. The accused is charged with endangering life and causing injuries to life and property and prosecuted under Sections 4 and 5 of the Act. Since he was carrying substances which were dangerous goods, he is also charged and prosecuted under Rule 3 of the Aircraft (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) Rules, 2003 and for having committed the offence under Section 10 of the Aircraft Act, 1934. Based upon such charges, the prosecution has examined 8 witnesses.

5.P.W.1 is the Security Officer, serving in Air India at Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Sahar, since 1982. He was having a duty of scanning of baggages of the passengers of the Oman flight. It is his evidence that when the passenger came and kept his bag on the Xray machine for scanning, he found incriminating articles. He kept the bag on the table and asked the passenger to open the bag. The passenger opened the bag. He found sutali bomb in one black colour plastic bag, two pairs of chappals, clothes and Oman Air ticket. This was less than the quantity of explosives that he saw in the X-ray image and hence he again checked the bag. Nothing was found. So he kept the box of chappals on the X-ray screen. He found explosives in the image of the chappals. He stopped the passenger and informed his superiors. The superiors called the Police from Sahar Police Station. The Police called the Panchas. The soles of the chappals were opened in the presence of the panchas. After opening the chappals, explosives were found in the sole of the chappals. The explosives were seized and he deposed that each chappal had crackers, anars, small crackers, sutali bomb, etc. These articles were seized and the panchanama was made. All the explosive substances found in the bag were produced in the Court and have been marked Articles A to E. The chappals have been marked Articles F to I. The chappals box and his clothes have been marked Articles J and K. He lodged an FIR. In his cross examination he disputed the fact that the passenger was an Oman national and could not speak Hindi, English and other languages. He did not feel any abnormality in his behaviour. He disputed the suggestion that the accused was a patient of affective disorder depressive type and having suicidal tendency. He has been cross-examined about the passport, ID card and ticket of the passenger, but with which this case is not concerned.

6.P.W.2 is the panch in whose presence the soles of the chappals were opened and the various explosive substances like crackers anar, suttali bomb and other explosives were seized. P.W.2 has proved by direct evidence the execution of the panchanama, which is marked Exhibit-20. He