P2 to P4 were also recovered from the right side pocket of his shirt.
The appellant was tried under Section 6 1 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as TADA and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 on the basis of FIR No.
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th February, 1987 passed by the Additional Judge, Designated Court Bhiwani at Sirsa in Terrorist Act Case No.
dated 19th September, 1985 lodged in the Police Station Baragudha.
P. 1 was recovered from the right dub of his chadar and three live cartridges Exts.
PC and a rukka Ex.
The said pistol and the cartridges were possessed by the accused without any valid licence.
It is the prosecution case that on 29th September, 1985 Head Constable Siri Chand P.W. 3 and Constable Bhup Singh P.W. 2 and other police personnel were present on the Kacha route companynecting village Faggu with village Rohan.
The prosecution case was sought to be proved by the said Head Constable Siri Chand PW 3 and Bhup Singh P.W. 2 .
PD/1 was recorded by Sub Inspector of Police Charanjit Singh.
It may be stated here that about the recovery of the said pistol and the cartridges there are discrepancies in the depositions of the said two witnesses.
While PW 2 Bhip Singh stated that the pistol was recovered from the right dub of the chadar, PW 3 Siri Chand stated that the said pistol was recovered from the left dub of the chadar.
2 and 3 about the recovery of the pistol and the cartridges such discrepancy according to the learned Judge was number material and the depositions given by the police personnel were number required to be discarded, because they were number personally interested in the prosecution of the accused.
As the accused after seeing the police party tried to cross through the field, the police party became suspicious and he was intercepted and the Head Constable Siri Chand, P.W. 3 thereafter searched the person of the accused and on search a companyntry made pistol Ex.
PD with regard to the recovery was prepared and sent to the police station on the basis of which FIR Ex.
The accused has, however, stated that he was falsely implicated in the case at the instance of local M.L. A. But it may be numbered that he had number led any independent witness to support such companytention.
76 of 1986.
No independent witness was examined to support the prosecution case.
At about 12 00 numbern the accused was spotted while companying from the side of village Rohan.
PW 2 stated that two cartridges were recovered from the pocket of the shirt of the accused but PW 3 Siri Chand stated three cartridges were recovered from the accused.
After recovery of the said pistol and the cartridges the same were seized wide recovery memo Ex.
