SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Gau) 395

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, Mir Alfaz Ali, JJ.
Mijink Basumatary @ Mainao - Appellant
Vs.
State of Assam And Another - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 2016
Decided On : 28-06-2019

Advocates Appeared:
R. De, Adv.

Headnote:

Explosive Substances Act, 1908 – Section 4(b) – Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 – Sections 10, 13 – Indian Penal Code – Sections 121, 121(A) – Explosive Rules, 2008 – Rules 128 (1), (2), (3), 6 (12) – Imprisonment Issue – This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang, Kajalgaon, Assam passed in Sessions Case whereby the accused/appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for another 06(six) months for committing the offence – Held, once the core requirement of doing the act or intention to do such act by an explosive or special category explosive is itself not proved, no offence can be found to have been committed by the accused appellant under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act – In view of such conclusion, we have no other option but to disagree with the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang in Sessions Case convicting the accused appellant under Section 4(b) of the Explosive Substances Act – Accordingly, the conviction of the accused appellant under Section 4(b) of the Explosive Substances Act and the sentence of imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default thereof, further simple imprisonment for six months is accordingly set aside – The accused appellant be set at liberty if not required for any other offence – Order Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J.

Heard Mr. SC Biswas, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. S Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

2. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 05.08.2016 of the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang, Kajalgaon, Assam passed in Sessions Case No.46(RKT)/2016, whereby the accused/appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for another 06(six) months for committing the offence under Section 4(b) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that an ejahar dated 07.12.2015 was lodged by Sub Inspector of Police namely Paul Lalhlimsang of Shantipur Police Post of Runikhata Police Station stating that based upon a secret information regarding presence of one NDFB(S) lady cadre namely Smti Mijing Basumatary at Dwigudung village, the informant along with police personnel and personnel of the 7th Sikh Army Camp, Khungring conducted a search operation at Dwigudung village at about 13.30 hours and apprehended one Smti Mijing Basumatary @ Mainao from the house of Smti Nani Muchahary at Dwigudung village. It was stated in the ejahar that on interrogation at the spot, the person arrested had confessed that she had kept one hand grenade and had lead the search party to the place where the grenade was concealed and accordingly the grenade was recovered and seized. It was further stated that on preliminary investigation, it was found that the person arrested is a trained NDFB(S) lady cadre and is actively involved in unlawful activities in the BTAD Area.

4. Accordingly, Runikhata Police Station Case No.66/2015 was registered under Sections 121/121(A) of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Sections 10/13 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967. Upon completion of the investigation, the matter was sent for trial, and charge was framed against the appellant Mijing Barumatary @ Mainao that on 07.12.2015 at about 13.30 hrs, she was apprehended by the police and the army personnel at Dwigudung village and one 36 H.E grenade was recovered on being lead by her and accordingly was charged of committing an offence under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

5. We have taken note of that although the FIR was registered under Sections 121/121(A) of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Sections 10/13 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967, but the charge was framed only under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

6. In course of the trial, the in-charge of the Shantipur Police Out Post of Runikhata Police Station deposed himself as PW-1 and stated as to in what manner the search was conducted in the Dwigudung village by the police personnel along with the army personnel of the 7th Sikh Light Infantry. The witness also deposed that in course of the search operation, the accused/appellant Mijing Basumatary @ Mainao upon being found in the house of Nani Muchahary was arrested. Upon interrogation, it could be learnt that the accused/appellant had joined the NDFB(S) in April, 2013 and that she had undergone training in Myanmer and after returning from the training, she had been working along with other NDFB(S) cadre in Silikhaguri village under Runikhata Police Station and that in October, 2014 she was married to one NDFB(S) cadre Jaola Basumatary, who subsequently died in an army encounter on 13.11.2015. It was also deposed that in course of the interrogation, the accused/appellant revealed that a hand grenade was kept concealed in a jungle at Dwigudung village and on being lead by her, the police personnel and the army authorities had seized the grenade infront of the villagers.

7. In cross-examination, the witness stated that some other villagers were also present when the accused/appellant had made her confession, but the names of such

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top