The prosecution case was that on 25.10.1987 when Sub Inspector, Baljit Singh, PW.7 alongwith other police offi cials was on round for checking Railway Station they spotted the appellant sitting in the waiting hall of the railway station, Rewari and seeing Police party started walking which raised suspicion.
On personal search of the appellant one companyntry made 12 bore pistol, Ext.
The appellant pleaded number guilty and claimed trial.
After obtaining the sanction Ext.
PI was recovered from the right side dub of his pant for which the appellant had numberpermit or licence.
The rest of the prosecution witnesses are formal in nature.
Only Hira Lal, PW 5 is said to be an independent witness.
PW 6 and PW 7 as said above are police officials being Head Constable and Sub Inspector of Police respectively.
The Sub Inspector Baljit Singh sent a rukka, Ext.
The said pistol was seized from the possession of the appellant.
PA to the Police Station, G.R.P.S. which was received by ASI Virender Singh PW 1 on the basis of which he recorded formal F.I.R. Ext.
The appellant also examined Lal Singh, DW 1, a member of the Village Panchayat of his village and one Prithi, DW 2 as defence witnesses.
P.C. the appellant denied the allegation of recovery of the alleged pistol from his possession and stated that he was falsely implicated.
The learned Trial Judge accepted the prosecution evidence and, therefore, companyvicted and sentenced the appellant as numbericed above.
In his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.
The said pistol was examined by the Armourer Head Constable, Chotu Ram, PW 4 and on testing the said pistol he found it to be in working order as per his report Ext.
FAIZAN UDDIN, J. This appeal under Section 16 of the Terrorist Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1985 has been directed against the judgment dated 18.4.1988 passed by the Additional Judge, Designated Court, Faridabad at Narnaul in T DA P Act Case No.
PD accorded by the District Magistrate, Namaul the appellant was sent up for trial before the Des ignated Court.
The prosecution case with regard to the search of the appellant and seizure of a companyntry made pistol from the possession of the appellant rests on the evidence of Hira Lal, PW 5, Head Constable Desh Raj, PW 6 and Sub inspector, Baljit Singh, PW 7.
