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

2018 Supreme(Jhk) 1964

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
Arun Kumar Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos. 225 with 155 of 2006
Decided On : 18-01-2018

Advocates Appeared:
M/s. Neelam Tiwary and Akshay Mahto, Advocates, for the Appellants; Addl. P.P, for the State

The judgment establishes the principle that causing physical injury is not essential to establish the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It also emphasizes the need for special reasons to impose a sentence less than the minimum prescribed for certain offences under the Arms Act.

Headnote:

Arms Act - Conviction under Section 25(1-B)(a) - Section 27 - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted for the offence of dacoity and possession of arms under the Arms Act. The prosecution's case was based on the recovery of firearms and looted money from the appellants at the place of occurrence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the evidence sufficient to prove the appellants' guilt for the offence under Section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act. The court also upheld the conviction of one appellant for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code based on circumstantial evidence.

Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence to establish guilt under the Arms Act and the Indian Penal Code, as well as the adequacy of the appellant's trial and sentencing.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that causing physical injury is not necessary to establish the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It also highlighted the requirement for special reasons to impose a sentence less than the minimum prescribed for certain offences under the Arms Act.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the sentence for the offence under Section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act was modified. One appellant was directed to undergo the remaining sentence, while the other had already served a significant period in custody.

ORDER

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. - Both these criminal applications arise out of the same judgment and as such they are being disposed of together by this common judgment.

2. Both these appeals have been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction dated 23.12.2005 and Order of Sentence dated 03.01.2006 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 226/125 of 2004-2005 whereby and whereunder both the appellants namely Arun Kumar Singh @ Vicky and Arun Kumar Das have been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 25 (1-B) (a) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. By the said judgment and order of sentence the appellant Arun Kumar Singh @ Vicky was also convicted for the offence punishable under section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and the appellant Arun Kumar Singh @ Vicky has also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 3,000/-.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief as mentioned by the informant Ram Chandra Ram, the S.I. is that on 01.10.2003 at about 10:10 p.m. a dacoity was committed in Barnawal Handloom Emporium (Kishore Textiles), Jugsalai in Jamshedpur. During the course of investigation, the informant along with police party reached near the place of occurrence and heard the sound of conversation between some persons from the bushes. There they saw a few persons hiding in the bushes in suspicious circumstances. The police party challenged the persons hiding behind the bushes. There was exchange of fire between two sides. Finally, the police party managed to arrest the appellant-accused persons. A country made pistol containing a fired cartridge case was recovered from the possession of Arun Kumar Singh @ Vicky along with Rs. 20,000/- looted from the Barnawal Handloom Emporium. From the possession of Arun Kumar Das one double barrel loaded country made pistol was recovered along with Rs. 10,000/-of the looted money of the said dacoity. The appellants confessed their guilt. Two more accused persons were arrested from the said bush and from their possession also, looted money of the dacoity was recovered. On the basis of confessional statement of the arrested accused persons of the case, two more accused persons were also arrested from a tempo and the money looted in the dacoity was also recovered from their possession. After completing of investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case.

4. Upon commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 (1-B) (a) of the Arms Act and section 27 of the Arms Act. Upon the accused''s pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, they were put to trial.

5. Vide order dated 23.12.2005, the charge under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code was altered by framing the charge under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. The said altered charge was read over and explained to the accused along with other co-accused persons.

6. During the trial, the prosecution altogether examined thirteen witness and proved documents and material exhibits. No witness, was examined on behalf of the defence.

7. Out of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W.2- Ram Chandra Ram has stated that on 01.10.2003 at about 10:10 p.m. he got the telephonic information about the dacoity in the cloth shop namely Barnawal Handloom Emporium. He along with other police personnel proceeded to the place of occurrence intimating the patrolling party over wireless. After reaching the place of occurrence, he came to know about the direction in which the accused persons have fled away and proceeded in that direction along with other police personnel and the staff of Barnawal Handloom Empor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top