Arjunan vs State represented by Inspector of Police and Others

B.P. Singh and S.H. Kapadia, JJ.—Counsel appearing for the State in SLP (Crl) No. 4858 of 2004 also accepts notice on behalf of the State in S.L.Ps. (Crl) Nos. 2677 of 2005 and 6107 of 2004. We have heard counsel for the parties.

Special leave granted.

The five Appellants before us (A-3 to A-7) alongwith others were tried in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1994 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvalluvar and by judgment and order dated 12.4.1996, they were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. The Appellants preferred appeals before the High Court. The Appellants were ultimately found guilty of the offence u/s 148, I.P.C. only, except A-3 and A-4 who were found guilty of the offence u/s 324 in addition to 148, I.P.C.

We may notice that the Appellants, who were accused 5, 6 and 7 before the trial court, were charged of the offences under Sections 148, 307/149, 364 and 302, I.P.C. The Appellants who were accused Nos. 3 and 4 before the trial court were charged of the offences under Sections 148, 307, 364 and 302, I.P.C. All of them have been convicted for committing the offence punishable u/s 148, I.P.C. A-3 and A-4 have also been found guilty of the offence punishable u/s 324, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for two-and-a-half years.

The question arises as to whether the conviction of these Appellants u/s 148, I.P.C. is justified. We notice that the charge against them, inter alia, was of forming an unlawful assembly which had as its common object the commission of an offence u/s 307, I.P.C. All the Appellants before us were acquitted of the charges under Sections 307, 364, 302 and/or 302/109 and 307/149, I.P.C. Surprisingly, they have been found guilty of the offence punishable u/s 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a term of one-and-a-half years and a fine of Rs. 1,000 and, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. In order to convict the Appellants of the offence u/s 148, I.P.C., it was necessary for the High Court to first record a finding that they were members of unlawful assembly. The High Court has not recorded a finding that they were members of an unlawful assembly. In fact, A-5 to A-7 have been acquitted of the charge u/s 307/149, I.P.C. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 were not even charged of the offence under Sections 307/149, I.P.C. We are, therefore, satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of the case, that there was neither any finding nor any material on record on the basis of which the Appellants could have been convicted of the offence punishable u/s 148, I.P.C. Their conviction and sentence u/s 148, I.P.C. is, therefore, set aside and they are acquitted of the charge.

So far as Accused Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, who are Appellants in the appeal arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 2677 of 2005, they were released on bail pursuant to an order dated 13.5.2005. By that time, we are told, they had already undergone the sentence of about two years. The sentence passed against them was for a period of two years and six months.

So far as the remaining Appellants are concerned, they were found guilty only u/s 148, I.P.C. and they were also released on bail pursuant to the order dated 15.10.2004. We, therefore, allow the appeals of Sivakumar, A-5, Arjunan, A-6 and Muniappan, A-7 and acquit them of the charge u/s 148, I.P.C. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged. So far as the Appellants Bose, A-3 and Natarajan, A-4 are concerned, they are acquitted of the charge u/s 148, I.P.C. and the sentence u/s 324, I.P.C. is reduced to the period already undergone by them. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged. The appeals are allowed accordingly.