2014 weapons’ smuggling case: Faridkot court drops UAPA against 10 accused
In October 2014, a case was registered against gangster Ranjit Singh alias Dupla and others for smuggling foreign-made weapons and supplying it to gangsters and civilians by forging sale bills. “These weapons were being used by gangsters and other criminals for carrying out snatching, dacoities, extortion and other crimes,” the police claimed
Claiming that the prosecution failed to place on record any valid sanction from a competent authority, the Faridkot court dropped the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) against 10 accused in the 2014 inter-state weapons’ smuggling case.
Faridkot additional sessions judge Rajiv Kalra transferred the case to the chief judicial magistrate to start a fresh trial on April 16.
In October 2014, a case was registered against gangster Ranjit Singh alias Dupla and others for smuggling foreign-made weapons and supplying it to gangsters and civilians by forging sale bills. “These weapons were being used by gangsters and other criminals for carrying out snatching, dacoities, extortion and other crimes,” the police claimed.
Three accused were arrested on October 21, 2014, which led to the recovery of 13 foreign-made weapons from different individuals, including gun house owners. In 2015, the police filed two chargesheets against eight accused, including Dupla, and framed charges against them the same year. However, the Faridkot police removed sections of the UAPA from the case while filling chargesheets.
In August 2020, the Punjab Police’s Organised Crime Control Unit (OCCU), which was headed by then IG Kunwar Vijay Partap Singh, now an AAP MLA, had taken over the probe. The same month, the OCCU arrested Satish Kumar, a gun house owner, and Pankaj Bansal, a Moga-based car dealer, for buying illegal weapons and forging sales bills.
OCCU reimposed Sections 16 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and added Arms Act in the FIR later. In October 2020, the OCCU filed a chargesheet against Kumar and Bansal.
In 2015, the police had given a clean chit to six persons, including Kumar and Bansal, claiming that Dupla and the others had passed the weapons as genuine in connivance with arms dealers and the buyers did not know the genuineness of the weapons. Bansal is also an accused in the 2015 Behbal Kalan police firing case, which was being probed by the SIT headed by Kunwar Vijay at the time.
As per information, the prime accused Dupla had fled the country after he was released on bail in 2016. He has been declared a proclaimed offender.
Judge Kalra, in an order dated March 28, said that as per initial records, the police submitted challan against eight accused for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 392, 120-B IPC.
“The trial was initiated before the area magistrate. A formal charge was framed and the prosecution examined 10 witnesses as per the list appended with the challan. During the trial, the prosecution filed a supplementary challan against co-accused Kumar and Bansal while adding offences under Section 16 and 18 of UAPA and Sections of the Arms Act. The prosecution moved an application for amendment of charge with further prayer to commit the trial to the designated court. While accepting the prayer, the trial magistrate on March 22, 2023, committed the case and the same was assigned to this court,” he said.
“The case was committed to this court primarily on the ground of the addition of UAPA and Section 45 of the Act creates a bar upon the court in taking cognisance unless and until there is appropriate sanction for prosecution accorded by the central government. However, the prosecution failed to place upon record any valid sanction for prosecution accorded by the competent authority,” the court said.
“Prima facie a case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act is made out against the accused and such case can be tried before the court of magistrate. Initially, a charge was framed against eight accused before area magistrate and with the addition of two more accused, the trial has to be re-initiated afresh. As per the scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the offence cannot be tried by the court of sessions judge and it is to be tried by the court of magistrate. The case is transferred to the court of chief judicial magistrate, Faridkot, for April 16 for holding trial after recording the plea of accused in accordance with law,” he added.