Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Jhk) 409

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
Mukesh Gowala - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 113 of 2020, Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 129 of 2020, Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 141 of 2020, Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 187 of 2020
Decided on : 28-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Mr. Gaurav, Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P.

IMPORTANT POINT
The conviction under the Arms Act and C.L.A. Act requires proof of conscious possession and active participation in an unlawful association, which was not established in this case.

Headnote:
[ARMS] - [CONVICTION UNDER ARMS ACT AND C.L.A. ACT] - [Sections 25(1-A), 26(2), 17(1), 17(2) of Arms Act; Section 17 of C.L.A. Act] - [The court discussed the legal provisions regarding possession of arms and the necessity of proving conscious possession and knowledge of the accused regarding the arms. It emphasized that mere possession of extremist literature does not constitute an offence under the C.L.A. Act without evidence of active participation in an unlawful association. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the necessary elements of the offences charged, leading to the conclusion that the convictions were unsustainable.]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for possession of illegal arms and extremist literature following a police patrol that led to the apprehension of several individuals. The police recovered a country-made pistol, cartridges, and pamphlets promoting an unlawful organization from the scene. The appellants claimed they were not in possession of the arms and that the evidence against them was insufficient.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution did not prove that the appellants had conscious possession of the arms or were members of the unlawful association. The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were contradictory, and the court ruled that the evidence presented did not meet the burden of proof required for conviction.
Issues: Whether the appellants had conscious possession of the arms and whether their actions constituted participation in an unlawful association under the Arms Act and C.L.A. Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that possession of arms requires knowledge and control over the weapon, and mere possession of extremist literature does not suffice to establish guilt under the C.L.A. Act without proof of active involvement in the unlawful association.
Final Decision: The court quashed the convictions and sentences of the appellants, discharging them from liability.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Since all these appeals arise out of same impugned judgment, as such all were heard together and decided by this common judgment.

3. These appeals have been preferred by the appellants challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 23.01.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Simdega in S.T. No.43/2018 arising out of Kurdeg P.S. Case. No. 21/17 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 179/17; whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 25(1-A)/35, 26(2)/35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 (1) (2) of C.L.A. Act and the appellants were sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of five years each along with fine of Rs.10,000/-each and in case of default, further R.I. of six months each for the offence under Section 25(1-A)/35 of Arms Act and R.I. for a period of five years each along with fine of Rs.10,000/-each and in case of default, further R.I. of six months each for the offence under Section 26(2)/35 of the Arms Act and further sentenced to undergo R.I. of six months for the offence under Section 17 (1) of C.L.A. Act and R.I. of two years for the offence under Section 17(2) of C.L.A. Act. It was further ordered that all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

4. The prosecution case in brief is that S.I. Sushil Kumar, Officer-in-charge Kurdeg Police Station recorded his self statement on 16.04.17 at 21:30 hours behind Kurdeg Bus Stand, in-front of Public Toilet inside lane. In his statement S.I. Sushil Kumar stated that he along with A.S.I. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Reserved Guard, Havildar-Sadanand Singh, trainee Havildar-Awadesh Ram, Police Constable-432 Nawal Kishore Oraon, Police Constable-291 Ajay Kumar, Police Constable-815 Kunal Kant Yadav had proceeded for evening patrolling on 16.06.17 at about 19:00 hours. While patrolling, they went to patrol village-Ghaghmunda, Dalki, Parkala via Jhirakmunda, Durga Mandir, then he received secret information that in-front of Public Toilet behind Kurdeg Bus Stand few people have assembled on two motorcycles and their activity appears to be suspicious. On this information he proceeded. When he reached public toilet behind the Kurdeg Bus Stand and lighted his torch, he saw few people were pasting pamphlets on the wall of public toilet, who became scared and started to flee after seeing the torch light. They were chased and three persons were caught, rest two persons escaped by taking benefit of night and bush. The persons who were caught, one by one they disclosed their names as Anand Soreng, Bipin Lakra and Mukesh Gowala. When they were inquired about the persons, who escaped from the place of occurrence, they disclosed their names as Kapil Pradhan and Tarsious Topno @ Suiya Munda. In presence of independent witnesses, namely, Anand Prasad Gupta and Ashok Bhuihar, apprehended accused persons were searched one by one. While search of Anand Soreng, one country made semi automatic pistol of 7.62 bore was recovered from left side of his waist with two 9 mm prohibited cartridge with magazine, on the bottom of the prohibited cartridge K.F. 9 mm was found written, five white colour chart papers was recovered in which PLFI was written in red colour ink along with anti government slogan, out of which two was recovered in pasted condition from wall of public toilet, three pamphlets was recovered from possession of accused Bipin Lakra, one Hero Honda Passion Pro Motorcycle bearing Reg. No. JH 20C-4078 and one Apache motorcycle bearing Reg. No. JH 20C-9636 were seized, one Lava company mobile phone bearing IMEI No. 91152055127262 was recovered from possession of accused Bipin Lakra, one Samsung Mobile phone bearing IMEI No. 359712052639900 with Airtel SIM was recovered from possession of accused Anand Soreng. Arrested persons failed to produce any licence and paper with regard to possession of illegal country made pistol, pamphlets and other articles. Accordingly, in prese