Sign in

Chandigarh’s Bapu Dham Colony man caught with country made pistol gets 1-year jail

According to police, Bapu Dham Colony resident Nagdev was caught with the pistol on August 29, 2019, and a case under the Arms Act was registered against him at the Sector-26 police station, Chandigarh. Police had received a tip-off that he had procured the weapon to settle a score with his brother’s brother-in-law.

Published on: Feb 17, 2023, 24:16:43 IST
By , Chandigarh
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

Carrying a country made pistol has landed a resident of Bapu Dham Colony in jail. Observing that the accused, Nagdev, doesn’t deserve leniency, a local court has sentenced him to one-year rigorous imprisonment and also fined him 500.

Carrying a country made pistol has landed a resident of Chandigarh’s Bapu Dham Colony in jail. Observing that the accused, Nagdev, doesn’t deserve leniency, a local court has sentenced him to one-year rigorous imprisonment and also fined him  ₹500. (Representational image)
Carrying a country made pistol has landed a resident of Chandigarh’s Bapu Dham Colony in jail. Observing that the accused, Nagdev, doesn’t deserve leniency, a local court has sentenced him to one-year rigorous imprisonment and also fined him ₹500. (Representational image)

According to police, Nagdev was caught with the pistol on August 29, 2019, and a case under the Arms Act was registered against him at the Sector-26 police station. Police had received a tip-off that he had procured the weapon to settle a score with his brother’s brother-in-law.

The accused had not been able to purchase any ammunition for the weapon and was arrested while going from Bapu Dham Colony to Manimajra to procure it.

During trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses to examine Nagdev’s guilt, while the defence, among other arguments, contended that there were no independent witnesses.

As the court convicted him, the accused prayed for leniency, stating that he was a first-time offender and had to look after his family. The prosecution, meanwhile, argued that keeping in view the gravity of the offence, severe punishment must be imposed.

Considering the prosecution’s contention, the court held that the accused didn’t deserve leniency or benefit of probation, and sentenced him to one-year rigorous imprisonment.