Jagdamba Singh vs State of U.P.

Virendra Saran, J.—Jagdamba Singh has preferred this appeal against the order dated 9.10.1998 of the Sessions Judge, Faizabad, passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 163 of 1998. By means of the impugned order the learned Sessions Judge rejected the application of the Appellant for release of his gun.

it appears that in connection with the murder of one Rajnath Singh the licensed gun of the Appellant was seized and Basdeo Singh and Bhanu Pratap Singh were tried for the offence u/s 302/34, I.P.C. for committing the said murder. Basdeo Singh was also prosecuted u/s 25/27 Arms Act. Both Basdeo Singh and Bhanu Pratap Singh were acquitted by the order dated 5.2.1996 of Sri R.D. Shukla, Sessions Judge, Faizabad. However, in the judgment the learned Sessions Judge observed that if, any appeal is filed the material exhibits shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of the High Court.

I have gone through the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Faizabad, passed in Sessions Trial Nos. 268 and 269 of 1993 as the same has been challenged in Government Appeal bearing Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1996 which has been admitted and is pending. The fact remains that the Appellant was not prosecuted in the said case and the learned Sessions Judge has found that there was no report of the Ballistic Expert which may connect the gun with the crime.

No doubt the findings of the learned Sessions Judge are under challenge in appeal but I am of the view that if the gun continue to remain in the Malkhana for a long time it will be rusted and may become useless. The appeal against acquittal which is of the year 1996 may take a decade or more for disposal.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the gun may be released to Jagdamba Singh, its licence-holder on the following conditions:

(i) The Appellant must possess a valid licence and shall produce the licence before the C.J.M. concerned for examination before release of the gun.

(ii) In case after the release of the gun the licence expires and is not renewed or is cancelled or suspended, the Appellant shall deposit the gun immediately either with the police of the concerned police station or with any arms dealer for its safe custody.

(iii) The Appellant shall not sell or otherwise transfer the gun to any one during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1996 and he shall give an undertaking to the C.J.M., Faizabad to the above effect.

(iv) Learned C.J.M., Faizabad, shall be at liberty to summon the gun from the Appellant for examination on his own discretion. The Appellant shall also give an undertaking to produce the gun before this Court as and when required.

The Appellant shall execute a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Faizabad, for the fulfilment of the above conditions.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 9.10.1998 of the Sessions Judge, Faizabad. is set aside. The gun in question shall be released in favour of the Appellant on the conditions mentioned above in the body of this judgment.

It is further directed that whenever Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1996 is listed the record of this appeal shall also be placed before the Court and office is directed to make a note of this fact on the memo of Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1996.