Subhash Kumar v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : September 14, 2016 Subhash Kumar @ Bura ....Appellant

VERSUS

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present :

Mr. Vishwas Arora, Advocate for Mr. Aman Kashyap, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Vikram Bishnoi, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. T.P.S. MANN, J.

The appellant, namely, Subhash Kumar @ Bura was tried for committing the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Vide judgment and order dated 24.12.2003, learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Kapurthala convicted him for the aforementioned offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- as fine and in default thereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. The sentence awarded in this case was ordered to run concurrently with the one awarded in the main case FIR No.1 dated 1.1.2003, Police Station Bholath. The period of detention during investigation or trial was ordered to be set off against the substantive sentence imposed upon him.

- 2 - Aggrieved of his conviction and sentence, the appellant filed the present appeal, which was admitted on 10.2.2004. Subsequently, vide order dated 8.4.2004, this Court suspended his sentence of imprisonment during the pendency of the appeal. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that after being apprehended in case FIR No.1 dated 1.1.2003 of Police Station Bholath under Sections 399 and 402 IPC, the appellant was searched and a spring actuated knife was recovered from the right inner pocket of his pant. The length of the blade was 6" and of handle was 7". Accordingly, FIR No.2 dated 1.1.2003 came to be registered against him at Police Station, Bholath, under Section 25 of the Arms Act. At the trial of the case, the prosecution examined PW1 HC Sukhdev Singh, PW2 SI Gurwinder Singh and PW3 ASI Jaswinder Singh.

When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellant pleaded his false implication and innocence.

In his defence, the appellant examined DW1 Ranbir Singh. The trial Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the record, believed the prosecution case and convicted and sentenced the appellant, as mentioned above. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the evidence with their able assistance, this Court finds that PW3 ASI Jaswinder Singh had testified about apprehending the

- 3 - appellant and conducting his search which led to recovery of a spring actuated knife from the right dub of his pant. His testimony was duly corroborated by PW1 HC Sukhdev Singh. Merely because no independent witness was joined in the police party is not sufficient to disbelieve the prosecution case.

In view of the above, no case is made out for any interference in the conviction of the appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act.

As regards the question of sentence, it may be noticed that the appellant is facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last more than 131⁄2 years. It is pleaded on his behalf that apart from the present case and the case arising out of FIR No.1 dated 1.1.2003, Police Station Bholath, which is the main case, he is not involved or convicted in any other criminal case. Out of the sentence of three years imposed upon him, he has already undergone a period of more than 1 year and 3 months. Prayer has, accordingly, been made for setting aside his remaining sentence of imprisonment.

As per the custody certificate already brought on record by the learned State counsel, the appellant has undergone an actual period of 1 year, 3 months and 18 days.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that no useful purpose would be served by sending the appellant behind the bars, once again, for undergoing his remaining sentence of imprisonment. Ends of justice would be suitably met if his substantive

- 4 - sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the one already undergone by him.

Resultantly, the conviction of the appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act is upheld. His substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the one already undergone by him. The fine of Rs.1,000/- is, however, enhanced to Rs.3,000/- and in default thereof, he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The sentence of imprisonment awarded in this case shall run concurrently with the sentence of imprisonment in the main case FIR No.1, dated 1.1.2003, Police Station Bholath.

The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.

( T.P.S. MANN ) September 14, 2016 JUDGE satish Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No