MAHANTESH BHOPAL BENNALLI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the records.

(2.) IT is an undisputed fact that the Raibhag police during the course of investigation in Crime No. 82/2012, has seized a revolver of NP.MPF Company 32 Caliber No. MK -1A1350/04 and also the licence of the revolver bearing No. DC/III/297/R -NPB dated 31.12.2013 pertaining to the petitioner. The petitioner approached the trial Court seeking return of the said revolver as well as the licence to the interim custody of the petitioner in order to produce the said licence and also the revolver to the licencing authority for renewal from 31.12.2013 onwards as, it is contended that the said licence was only valid up to 31.12.2013. Within a stipulated period the said licence has to be got renewed by the petitioner. Learned Sessions judge has rejected the said application on the ground that the said revolver is required for the identification at the time of evidence as charge sheet filed for the offences under Sections 3, 5, read with 25(1)(A), 27, 29(A) of Arms Act.

(3.) LEARNED Additional State Public Prosecutor submits that the police at the time of seizure of the weapon have seized, sealed and produced before the Court. If it is released in favour of the petitioner, there may be chances of tampering the said weapon during the course of trial, there may arise a problem with regard to the identification of the said revolver.