- (1.) This is an appeal under Sec. 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter TADA).
(2.) The prosecution story, as emerging from the record is that a complaint was lodged by one Jugal Kishore Puran Lai Gupta-complainant, with Gomtipur Police Station on 10-7-1992 alleging that when he was rehiring after visiting his brother's Video Cassette Library located near Vivekananda Mills on a bicycle, near Arbuda Mills, he found one unknown person coming towards him. On reaching near the complainant, that person took out a knife and gave him a blow on his abdomen. Two or three more persons came out from a nearby Chawl and asked the assailant to drag the complainant into the Chawl. While being dragged towards the Chawl, he was given one more blow on the left side of his neck. The assailant also inflicted a knife blow on his back. The complainant, however, managed to free himself and started running towards the four cross-roads. He found one police jeep on patrol duty and the police took him to the hospital. A complaint was thereafter lodged and investigation taken in hand. The co-accused of the appellant was released on bail during the investigation but at the time of framing of the charge-sheet, the co-accused did not trun up and even the sureties could not be located. On the request of the Public Prosecutor, the case of the appellant was separated and on 30-7-1993, the appellant was put up for trial for offences under Sec. 324 IPC, Sec. 3(1) of TADA and Sec. 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. The trial Court after recording the evidence led by the prosecution and exhibiting the injury certificate received from the hospital, Ex. P-ll formulated the following three points for consideration : "(1) Does the prosecution prove that on 10-7-1992 at about 9-30 p.m. near Arbuda Mills situated within Gomtipur Police Station limits the present accused along with the absconding accused Saleem Ibrahim Shaikh voluntarily caused hurt on the complainant Jugal Kishore Puran Lai Gupta by means of any instrument for stabbing or cutting, or any instrument, which if used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death and has, thus rendered himself liable for the offence punishable under Sec. 324 of the Indian Penal Code (2) Does the prosecution prove that on the aforesaid date, time and place the present accused by carrying with him any weapon in violation of any prohibitory order issued by any competent authority has committed the offence punishable under Sec. 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act (3) Does the prosecution prove that on the aforesaid date, time and place the present accused with intent to strike terror in the people or any section of the people or to alienate any section of the people or to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people did any act or thing by using lethal weapon like knife or razor in such a manner as to cause, or as is likely to cause death of, or injuries to, any person or persons and has committed a terrorist act as defmied in Sec. 3(1) of the TADA (Prevention) Act punishable under Sec. 3(2) of the said Act -
(3.) The trial Court found that the charge against the appellant for the offence under Sec. 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act was not made out and consequently the appellant was acquitted of the said charge.;