Jharkhand HC Acquits Man In 494-Detonator Case After Both Seizure Witnesses Deny Recovery From Him

On 2 March 2000, police personnel on patrol allegedly apprehended Nasim Mian at a hotel in Subash Chowk, Karmtanr, and recovered a bag said to contain 494 detonators and fuse wire.

A case was registered under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, and the Sessions Court convicted him and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹5,000.

On appeal, the appellant challenged the alleged recovery and the reliability of the prosecution evidence.

The two seizure witnesses had been declared hostile; the appellant also relied on the absence of independent corroboration and the non-examination of the Investigating Officer.

The charge was under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

The court applied the principle that a conviction requires the prosecution to prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, including the alleged recovery and the accused’s connection to the seized articles.

The court found that both seizure witnesses denied witnessing any recovery: one stated that nothing was recovered from the appellant, while the other said his thumb impression had been taken on a blank paper at the police station the following day.

The seizure list and FSL report also described the articles in a manner the court considered inconsistent with the prosecution’s account that the appellant carried them in a bag while fleeing.

In the absence of corroboration from independent local witnesses, the court concluded that the alleged recovery from the appellant had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

It held that the trial court had not properly considered the evidence and the circumstances of the alleged apprehension and seizure.

As the appellant was on bail, he was discharged from his bail bond and his sureties were discharged; the appeal was allowed.