- (1.) By his judgment and order dated 12/6/1993 the Additional Judge, Designated court, amritsar convicted and sentenced the appellant under S. 387 and 392 Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 ('tada' for short). Aggrieved thereby the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 19 of TADA.
(2.) The case of the prosecution is as under: (A) Nirmal Singh carries on business in silver ornaments and lives with his wife Kuldip Kaur in Gali No. 1, Tej Nagar, amritsar. Formerly the appellant was a resident of the same locality and was known to Nirmal Singh. In or about the month of June 1990 Nirmal Singh received a letter from the appellant demanding a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs for purchase of weapons for the terrorists and threatening that in case the money was not paid he (Nirmal Singh) would have to face dire consequences. Nirmal Singh talked with his wife over the demand and went to meet the appellant who had by then shifted to Gali Baghwali and was running a wheat bran depot. The appellant took away the letter from him and told that he would meet the members of the group at whose instance he had written that letter. A few days later the appellant came to the house of Nirmal Singh and asked him to accompany him to settle the amount to be paid in terms of his letter. Along with the appellant when Nirmal Singh went to the depot of the former, he found a man sitting there with a revolver in his hand. That man asked Nirmal Singh, after putting him in fear of death, whether he was prepared to pay the amount demanded. On his expressing inability to pay the demanded sum, a bargain was struck whereunder Nirmal Singh was to pay Rs. 70,000. 00 to the appellant within three days. Within the stipulated time Nirmal Singh however could collect only Rs. 50,000. 00; and accordingly with the notes wrapped in a polythene bag and accompanied by Manohar Singh, Nirmal Singh went to the depot of the appellant and handed over the same to him and undertook to pay the balance of Rs. 20,000. 00 within two months. The appellant told him that in case he reported the matter to the police he would be killed. Though, owing to the threat so meted out, Nirmal Singh did not lodge any complaint with the police about the extortion, Gurmit Chand, Inspector of Police (Operation) , amritsar got that information on 1/8/1990 and, on that basis, registered a case against the appellant and one Balwinder Singh. (B) After registering the case Gurmit Chand took up investigation and raided the house of the appellant on 2/8/1990 and arrested him. On interrogation he made a statement that he had kept concealed currency notes worth Rs. 20,000. 00 under bundles of wheat bran his depot; and pursuant thereto two bundles of currency notes, each containing Rs. 10,000. 00, were recovered therefrom. Gurmit Chand seized those bundles of currency notes in the presence of Manohar Singh (Public Witness 2, who had accompanied the police party. On completion of investigation he submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant.
(3.) To prove its case the prosecution examined five witnesses, namely, Kuldip Kaur (Public Witness 1, Manohar Singh (Public Witness 2, Nirmal Singh (Public Witness 3, Inspector Gurmit Chand (Public Witness 4 and Inspector Rattan Lal (Public Witness 5. Of them Public Witness 1, wife of Nirmal Singh, did not fully support the prosecution case and Manohar Singh (Public Witness 2 at all, for which both of them were declared hostile.;