1998 (9) TMI 694

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, by the Court of Additional District Judge, Designated Court, Sangrur. What has been held proved against the appellant is that he was found in possession of one sten-gun bearing No. 13303 and two magazines containing in all 12 live cartridges. The Designated Court relying upon the evidence of Inspector Gurmel Singh, P.W. 2 and A.S.I. Amrik Singh, P.W. 3 held....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ns 399 and 402 IPC and Section 3 of the TADA Act. The appellant was not tried in that case for possession of fire arms without a valid licence. He was also not tried for the offences punishable under Section 5 of the TADA Act. It, therefore, cannot be said that the appellant was tried earlier for the same offences and therefore he could not have been tried again. In the trial for the offences puni....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dure Code. What is overlooked by the learned counsel is that it is an enabling provision which permits the court to try more than one offence in one trial. The court may or may not try all the offences together in one trial. It cannot be said that by trying separately the Designated Court committed any illegality. 4. It was next contended that the prosecution had not led any evidence to prove t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orking condition by the Armourer. The cartridges were also found live by him. 5. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel that the accused had raised a specific defence in this case and therefore the evidence of defence witnesses should have been accepted. The defence was that the appellant was taken into custody by the police 15 days before the date of incident and that the complaint in ....