NEW DELHI: A Delhi court has upheld the four-year rigorous imprisonment sentence of a man found in possession of an illegal pistol made in the country, saying the convict had shown a propensity for repetitive criminal behaviour.
Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Partap Singh, who was hearing the appeal filed by Virender alias Kala Badal, against the bench’s October 2025 order sentencing him under the Arms Act, asserted that the credibility of police witnesses cannot be doubted merely because they belong to the law enforcement agency of the state.
According to the prosecution, Virender was arrested by the Crime Branch on June 17, 2019 near Garida village here following a tip-off.
A homemade single-shot pistol and two live cartridges were found in his possession.
“It is well established that there is no weakness in the testimony of police officials merely because they belong to the police force, and there is no rule of law that a conviction cannot be recorded on the evidence of police officials, if found to be reliable, unless it is supported by independent evidence,” the court said in an order dated July 9.
She said that the principle that a person acts honestly applies equally to a police officer, unless proven otherwise, and it is not the correct judicial approach to view the testimony of a police witness with suspicion or distrust without a valid basis.
In his appeal, Virender claimed that he was falsely implicated due to personal enmity, alleging that police had previously killed his brother while in custody. He also claimed that there were no independent public witnesses and a discrepancy in the seal used on the seized weapon.
In rejecting these allegations, the court said that the police did try to join bystanders as independent witnesses, but they refused to join.
“Just because there is no videography or photography of the alleged recovery, it cannot be said that the recovery did not take place,” the court said, adding that the discrepancy in the seal was an “inadvertent typographical error” that did not disturb the chain of custody.
Regarding the claim of false impeachment due to the death of his brother in custody, the court noted that this claim was raised for the first time during the appeal.
“The petition now sought finds no support whatsoever in the record of the trial court, and no such defense was ever advanced at the trial stage,” the judge said.
While the court upheld the sentence, it took into account the convict’s extensive criminal record, which included previous cases involving drugs, theft, robbery and attempted murder.
“Considering that the appellant/convict is already convicted of offenses under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Arms Act, for the commission of the crime of robbery, as well as for one of the most serious crimes, namely, attempted murder punishable under Section 307 of the IPC, this court finds no reason to interfere with or vary the sentence passed by the trial court.”
He said that the submissions made by the appellant regarding his reform in custody, his role as the sole breadwinner of the family, and the hardships faced by his family members, although referred to, did not outweigh the seriousness of the offense and the appellant’s “propensity towards repetitive criminal behaviour, including offenses of a serious and violent nature”.
This article was generated from an automated news feed without any modifications to the text.
