State of U.P. vs Ajai Kumar

G.S.N. Tripathi, J.—This is an appeal filed u/s 378, Code of Criminal Procedure against the order of acquittal passed by the C.J.M. Pilibhit on a charge u/s 21(1) of the Arms Act.

The main allegation against the accused is that Shanti Swarup Saxena, S/o Chottey Lal was a licence-holder of licence No. 906 in respect of a D.B.L. Gun. Sri. Saxena died on 29.11.84. His son, Sri. Ajai Kumar deposited the gun with Mishra Gun House, Station Road, Pilibhit. However, he held it with him from 30.11.84 to 12.1.85 without a licence. Therefore, He committed an offence u/s 21(1) of the Arms Act.

The accused in his plea taken in the Court below stated that there was no space available with Mishra Gun House for depositing the gun. Therefore, he expressed his inability to keep it with him. As and when the space was available, he deposited the gun without any loss of time. Thus, he committed no offence.

The prosecution examined Kashi Prasad Mishra, P.W. 1. He has admitted this fact that there was no space available with him for depositing the gun upto 12.1.85. So he supports inherently the version of the accused.

Another fault of the prosecution case was that whereas the District Magistrate granted sanction for prosecution u/s 25, Arms Act, the prosecution was launched u/s 21(1) of the Arms Act. Therefore, there was no application of mind in granting the sanction. The entire prosecution is liable to be thrown out on this ground alone.

After perusal of the entire evidence and circumstances on the record, the learned trial Court committed no error either on fact or on law. His judgment is perfectly correct, which does not permit any interference by this Court.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.