The central legal point established in the judgment is the classification of documents as restricted under the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and the potential prejudicial impact on the safety and security of the State.

JUDGMENT :

Vibhu Bakhru, J.

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning the judgment dated 28.10.2016 passed by the learned ASJ convicting the appellant of an offence under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 for being in possession of restricted documents relating to the Indian Army, which could be prejudicial to the security and interest of the State. The appellant was also convicted of an offence under Section 474 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for possessing forged documents such as driving license, ration card, school certificate, false disclosure regarding his address and date of birth for obtaining his first passport.

2. The appellant also impugns an order dated 09.11.2016, whereby he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine years for the offence under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and for a period of four years along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 474 of the IPC. It was also directed that the appellant would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of nine months if he defaulted in the payment of the fine imposed on him.

3. The judgment was rendered in connection with FIR No. 36/2012 under Sections 419/420/468/471/120B of the IPC; Sections 3/9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923; and Sections 14-A and 14-B of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

Prosecution's case

4. It is the prosecution's case that information had been received that a Pakistani national living in Kolkata, Asif Hussain (appellant herein), was working as a secret agent for the Pakistani army and collecting and sending sensitive information about the Indian Army to them. On the day of the incident - that is on 13.02.2012 - further secret information was received that the said accused was coming to Delhi for meeting his contact and would be returning the same day. He could be apprehended if an immediate raid was conducted. A raiding party was constituted and took positions near Chelmsford Road, IRCA Building, New Delhi Railway Station. A few passersby were requested to join the raiding party but they did not agree. After some time, the accused was seen coming on foot and upon identification by the secret informer, he was apprehended. The raiding party disclosed their identity and offered the accused an option to search them, however the accused refused. On searching the accused, raiding party found a white envelope containing documents relating to the Indian army. The accused could not offer an explanation for possessing the said documents. The said documents were seized and sealed and were signed by the accused, as well as the witnesses. Accused was further searched and from his bag, his Indian passport, PAN card, Driving License, Voter identity card, debit card and railway tickets were found, which were also seized. Thereafter, the rukka was sent and further investigation was marked to the Investigating Officer (IO). IO arrived at the spot and arrested the accused. The documents recovered were handed over to him. On obtaining PC remand, the accused thereafter led them to his house at Kolkata, from where further documents and another driving license was recovered and seized.

5. The prosecution stated that all the documents were sent for verification and it was revealed that the documents of the Indian Army recovered from the accused were restricted and were for official use. Unauthorized communication of the same was prejudicial to the interests and safety of the State. One driving license and the accused's school certificate were found to be forged and fabricated and other documents such as the Passport, Pan card, I-card etc., were found to be obtained on the basis of forged and fabricated documents and disclosures.

6. The prosecution contended the accused had entered India under the name Kamran Akbar, registered himself with the Foreigners Regional Officer Kolkata, but had not returned to Pakistan. It was also stated that the accused had disclosed the name of his sponsor but he wa