JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
DILIP KUMAR SINHA, J.
Baleshwar Yadav alias Shyamji
Versus
State of Jharkhand.
Cri. Appeal No. 1306 of 2006
Decided on : 11 -12 -2007.
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Sections 386, 307, and 323, I.P.C., Section 25(1-B) a, 26, and 27, Arms Act, and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the charges under Sections 386, 307, and 323, I.P.C., and Sections 26, 27, and 25(1-B)a of the Arms Act, and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908. The key legal provisions discussed included the elements of each offense, the requirement of legal evidence, and the burden of proof on the prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Arms Act, and Criminal Law Amendment Act based on the prosecution's story of his involvement in criminal activities, possession of firearms, and association with an unlawful organization. The appellant denied his guilt and claimed to be falsely implicated.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges under Sections 386, 307, and 323, I.P.C., but upheld the charges under Sections 26, 27, and 25(1-B)a of the Arms Act, and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant were affirmed with modifications.
Issues: The issues included the lack of legal evidence for certain charges, the validity of the appellant's arrest, and the sufficiency of proof for the charges under different acts and sections.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the failure of the prosecution to provide legal evidence for certain charges, the inconsistency in witness testimonies, and the lack of proof for specific elements of the offenses. The court also considered the nexus of the appellant with the unlawful organization based on the recovery of incriminating materials.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant were affirmed with modifications.
2. The prosecution story as it stands narrated in the written report ( Ext. 6) of the informant P.W. 9 Harish Kumar Pathak, S.I. of Police, Kuru Police Station ( Latehar District) addressed to the Officer-in-charge, Chandwa Police Station ( District Latehar) was that he received information from the Superintendent of Police, Lohardagga on 22-8-2005 in the wee hours at about 2 a.m. that the appellant Baleshwar Yadav, Zonal Commander of M.C.C. was staying at village Rajgurua and pursuant to such information, three raiding parties of police were organized on the command of the S.P., Lohardagga and the raiding parties arrived at village Rajgurua where the informant was communicated by the said S.P. that though Baleshwar Yadav alias Shyamji was staying there for some time but he proceeded to the house of the widow namely Parvati Devi at village Senha within Chandwa Police Station and accordingly he was directed to immediately conduct raid. The informant informed Chandwa Police Station on wireless by requesting to assist in the raid to be conducted for the arrest of the appellant and the raiding parties arrived at village Senha. On the command of the S.P., Lohardagga when the door of the suspected house was knocked, a woman came out and in the same transaction, a person attempted to escape from the back door of the house carrying a bag. When that person was challenged and asked to stop, he turned back and resorted fire from his pistol but misfired. The raiding party commanded him to surrender but the person again fired shot. Fires were exchanged by the raiding party including the informant in the air, only with a view to terrorize and after chase the appellant was apprehended and a pistol was recovered from his possession which contained two cartridges of 9 m.m. in the magazine i.e. one misfired and another fired cartridge. On search of the bag of the appellant, in presence of the witnesses, the informant narrated that Rs.1,00,000/- ( one lakh) in cash, letter pad of C.P.I. (M), receipt books, papers relating to transaction of levy, pomphlets and many other incriminating materials were recovered. The appellant confessed that he was the Zonal Commander of M.C.C. The pistol recovered from his possession was found made in Italy but without authority or licence of such possession. The appellant was arrested and seizure list of the articles recovered from his possession was prepared in presence of the independent witnesses. On the statement of the informant, Chandwa P.S. Case No. 80 of 2005 was registered on 22-08-2005 for the offence under Sections 386, 307, 333, 323, I.P.C., under Section 25(1-B) a/26/27 Arms Act and under Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908. The appellant was remanded to judicial custody on 23-8-2005.
3. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the appellant Baleshwar Yadav @ Shyamji under aforesaid Sections in various Acts in which F.I.R. was lodged.
4. The appella
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.