JUDGMENT :

M.S. Sonak, J.

Heard Mr. S.R. Rivankar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. J.A. Lobo, learned Counsel appointed under the Legal Aid Scheme, who appears on behalf of the Respondent.

2. This Appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 10th July, 2008, passed by the learned Adhoc Assistant Sessions Judge, FTC-I, South Goa at Margao, (learned Sessions Judge) in Sessions Case No.15/2006, acquitting the Respondent of the charges under Sections 121, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 7, read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 164, read with Section 179 of the Railways Act, 1989.

3. The Charge framed by the learned Sessions Judge on 17th October, 2006 in this matter, reads as follows :

"I, Shri N.S. Amonkar, Adhoc Asst. Sessions Judge, FTC-I, Margao, hereby charge you Tariq Ahmad Buttloo, s/o Jalaluddin Buttloo, r/o c/o Near Tindala High School, Basantbag, Ganpatyar Srinagar, Kashmir as follows:-

That you on the 10th day of March, 2006 at 20.30 hours was caught red handed when alighting from Mangala Express at Konkan Railway Station, Margao and during the search of the suitcase carried by you two spherical heavy objects wrapped in a muffler and cardboard backing, two silver coloured cylindrical objects partly packed in an envelope, a sealed plastic packet containing black coloured powder, a camera, two cell phones, identity cards in different names and a web camera were found in your possession and on interrogation, you informed that black coloured powder in the plastic packet to be RDX and spherical objects to be hand grenades and cylindrical objects to be detonators. You were carrying the said explosives without any permission or licence and you disclosed yourself to be a member of Teheriq-Ul-Mujahiddin. You have thus committed an offence under Section 121 of I.P.C., Section 4 & 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 7 r/w Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and Section 164 r/w Section 179 of Railways Act.

Further, you have impersonated yourself as Irshad Ahamad Bhat to Smt. Clara Gonsalves and signed a leave and licence agreement with her for occupying her flat situated at building Rosa Mystica, Sirvodem, Margao. You have thus committed an offence under Section 419 and 420 of I.P.C.

And I hereby direct that you be tried by this court on the above charges

Sd/-

(N.S. Amonkar)

Margao

Adhoc Assistant Sessions Judge,

Dated : 17.10.2006.

Fast Track Court-I, South Goa

Margao"

4. The Respondent pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In fact, the Respondent, in his arguments opposing framing of charge, took up a specific plea that he was never arrested at the Margao Konkan Railway Station as alleged by the Prosecution on 10th March, 2006, but was arrested on 3rd March, 2006 at about 3.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. by Police Inspector Krishna Shetgaocar of CID, Crime Branch, near Grace Church, at Margao and after being detained illegally, it was made to appear as if he was apprehended at the Railway Station whilst alighting from the train.

5. The Prosecution has examined, in all, 27 witnesses. Thereafter, the Respondent was questioned in terms of Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in which, again, he has taken a specific plea about being in custody from 3rd March, 2006 and denying altogether the incident of arrest on the Railway Station on 10th March, 2006. The Respondent also produced on record some Judgment and Orders made by the Courts in Jummu and Kashmir, in which, the detention orders issued against him were set aside, or, in which, the Respondent was acquitted by the Sessions Court.

6. The learned Sessions Judge, by the impugned Judgment and Order dated 10th July, 2008, has acquitted the Respondent of all the charges leveled against him. Hence, the present appeal by the Appellant-State.

7. Mr. Rivankar, learned Public Prosecutor, at the outset, criticized the impugned Judgment a