On 23rd September, 1993 these radio active resources were found missing from the office premises.
The present six appellants were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 451, 381 read with 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 3 of TADA P Act.
Later on the investigation was handed over to the C.B.C.I.D. and PW 26 Inspector of Police took over the investigation and he filed a report before the Court invoking the provisions of the TADA Act.
They were carrying out the companytract of offshore logging under the O.N.G.C. There was some dispute between the employees and the management over the transfer of A 1 to Bombay office and the appellants allege that PW 1, who was the Operations Manager of the companypany, was inimically having disputes towards these accused.
The Superintendent of Police recorded the companyfessional statement the appellants 2,3 and 4 and pursuant to the companyfessions, certain recoveries were also effected and the three radio active resources were recovered and later on the final report was filed in the case.
Heard both sides.
The Sub Inspector of Police PW 20 took up the investigation and these appellants were arrested thereafter.
On behalf of the prosecution, 26 witnesses have been examined.
On 24th September, 1993 PW 1 gave a companyplaint before the Station House Officer, Maduravayal police station.
These two appeals were filed against the judgment of the Designated Court NO.II, Madras number Chennai under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1987 hereinafter referred to as TADA Act .
These appellants were employees of Halliburton Offshore Services Inc.Company.
The companypany was in possession of certain radio active resources to find out the resource of natural gas.
The allegation against these appellants is that they have unlawfully trespassed into the workshop of the companypany and took away three radio active resources and thereby companymitted the offences as charged.
These appellants were acquitted of the offence under T.A.D.A. but they were found guilty of offences under Sections 451 and 381 read with Section 120 B of I.P.C. On both these companynts, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each and the sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
The appellants were found guilty on the basis of their companyfessions and also the recovery made pursuant to the statements made by the accused.
