MOHD ISHAQ Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/A5 was charged with offence punishable under Section 9-B of the Explosives Act in S.C. No. 273 of 2009 before the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The lower Court while acquitting the Appellant/A5 of the said charge, ordered confiscation of MO.1 Van along with explosive substances covered by Ex.P5, to the State. Though A5 filed this appeal against the said order of confiscation of the Van as well as explosive substances, the Appellant's counsel fairly submitted that he Is confining his argument in this appeal only in respect of confiscation of MO.1 Van.

(2.) A5 is owner of MO.1 Van and licenced dealer of explosives under the Explosives Act, 1884. It is alleged that A5 illegally supplied the explosive material to A1, A3 and A4 who are unauthorized persons and that A2 is associate of A1.

(3.) In my opinion, detailed scrutiny of reasons given by the lower Court for recording acquittal against A1 to A5 may not be relevant in this appeal, where scope before this Court is limited to confiscation of MO.1 Van bearing No. AP29 T 8435. It is sufficient to note that order of confiscation of MO.1 Van by the lower Court is contrary to language employed in Section 10 of the Explosives Act, 1884. Section 10 of the said Act reads as follows: