NANAVATI, J. - (1.)THE appellant has been convicted by the Special Court, Ferozepore for the offence punishable under Section 397 IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for seven years. He has also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for two years. He is challenging the said order of conviction and sentence in this appeal, filed under Section 14 of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act, 1984. His conviction is based upon the evidence of Balwant Ram (PW) and Ram Lubhaya (PW 2).
(2.)BALWANT Ram (PW 1) in his evidence has stated that he has been working as a mechanic in the workshop of Surinder Kumar at Abohar. On 31 -5 -1984 one person from Vinod Bus Service came to that workshop as one tyre of his motor cycle got punctured near Rajpur and he wanted it to be repaired. He, therefore, took the scooter of Vinod and left for that place. He found that the tube was almost torn and it was necessary to change it. While he was returning on that scooter to get a new tube and had reached the railway crossing on the way, two persons stopped him by pointing a revolver at him. It was about 6.30 p.m. The revolver was in the hand of the appellant. Due to the threat given to him he got down from the scooter. The appellant and his companion then took it away. So he went to the police station and lodged a complaint. The police then took him to the place of offence and thereafter all of them went in search of the accused. At about 9 p.m. they found the appellant and his companion standing near the scooter on the Sito -Malout Road. The police inspector ordered the accused to remain there and alighted from the jeep with other policemen. At that time the accused fired one shot at the police and tried to run away through the fields. Even while doing so they went on firing at the police who were chasing them. The police had also fired a few shots at the accused. After the accused were chased for a distance of two to three kilometres, the police was able to apprehend the appellant but his companion escaped.
(3.)RAM Lubhaya (PW 2), who was then the Inspector -in -charge of Abohar Police Station has stated in his evidence that at about 7.00 p.m., Balwant Ram (PW 1) came to the police station and informed him about the incident of robbery. So he recorded his complaint and along with some policemen and Balwant Ram (PW 1) went first to the place of offence and then in search of the accused. At about 9.00 p.m. they spotted the scooter on Sito -Malout Road. When he asked the two persons standing by the side of the scooter to remain there, they started running away from that place. One of the accused fired at them. He and other policemen left the jeep and ran after the accused. While running away the accused fired about 10 shots at them and they also fired a few shots in return. While running accused Bhupinder Singh fell down and was caught, but his companion escaped.
As the other accused was absconding, only the appellant was put up for trial. The learned Special Judge believed the evidence of the said two witnesses and convicted the appellant. He disbelieved the defence of the appellant that while he was returning after seeing his relative, Sukhchain Singh residing at Village Mani -Khera, he noticed that one person was killed by the police; and, therefore, he asked the police as to why they had killed him. This was not liked by the police and, therefore, he was falsely involved. The learned Special Judge also disbelieved Sukhchain Singh (DW 1) who was examined by the defence.