IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No.706-SB of 2001 Date of Decision : September 23, 2010 Shakeel Ahmed ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Sunil Chadha, Advocate as amicus curiae for the appellant. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated April 11, 2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. According to the prosecution, on 10.12.1998, SI Balbir Singh, alongwith his fellow officials, was present on the road in front of Railway Station, Ludhiana. Upon receiving a secret information, he conducted the raid at Clock Tower Park and found five persons sitting there. On seeing the police party, all the five persons started running away in different directions. One of them was apprehended by the police party headed by SI Nirmaljit Singh and on enquiry disclosed his Criminal Appeal No.706-SB of 2001 -2- name as Shakeel Ahmed son of Maqsood Mohmad. His personal search led to recovery of a country made pistol of .303 bore, which he was holding in his right hand, and three live cartridges of the same bore. The appellant did not produce any valid licence or permit for keeping in his possession the country made pistol and the live cartridges. Accordingly, ruqa Ex.PD was prepared by SI Nirmaljit Singh, which was sent to the Police Station where FIR No.148 dated 10.12.1998 was registered against the appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction of his client for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. However, he has submitted that with regard to the main occurrence, FIR No.147 dated 10.12.1998 was registered at Police Station, Kotwali Ludhiana against the appellant and four others for offences under Sections 399 and 402 IPC. The trial of the said FIR has culminated in the acquittal of the appellant. The appellant has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last about 12 years. He remained in custody during investigation/trial of the case for some time. Upon his conviction and sentence by the trial Court on 11.4.2001, he was again taken into custody and it was only on 21.6.2001 that he was granted the concession of bail by this Court. The appellant is a first offender. He was about 28 years of age at the time of the trial. He has a large family consisting of his old parents and four children to look after. Therefore, the substantive sentence of the appellant be reduced to that already undergone by him. Criminal Appeal No.706-SB of 2001 -3- Learned State counsel has submitted that the appellant kept a fire arm and three live cartridges in his possession for which he did not have any licence or permit, therefore, he does not deserve any concession in the matter of sentence. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the Court is of the view 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 amply met if his substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by him. Resultantly, the conviction of the appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act is maintained. His substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by him. However, the sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.5,000/- and in default thereof, the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. ( T.P.S.MANN ) September 23, 2010 JUDGE satish