SATYANARAYAN PATIDAR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the appellate judgment given by the Additional Sessions Judge, Neemuch, whereby the applicant's conviction under S. 25 (a) of the Indian Arms Act and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year have been maintained.

(2.) THE prosecution case against the applicant was that on 12 -9 -1976 some officers of the Narcotics Department had taken a search of the house of the accused -applicant at about 9 a.m. in village Barlai, police station Rampura and during this search a 32 bore revolver with 20 live cartridges and 9 empty cartridges were recovered. The applicant was absent, but his wife was present. The applicant had no licence for possession of this fire -arm and ammunitions. The officers of the Narcotics department then forwarded the report, Ex. p/3, to the Rampura police station After seizing the revolver and the ammunitions a Panchnama (Ex. P/1) was made. On the report, Ex. P/3, an offence was registered by the police vide. Ex. P/4. The Station House officer, Rampura then investigated into the matter and after obtaining the sanction of the District Magistrate, Mandsaur, prosecuted the accused for the aforesaid offences.

(3.) IN this Court the learned counsel for the applicant raised the following grounds: (i) that there is no valid sanction for the prosecution of the applicant for the alleged commission of the aforesaid offences; (ii) that the applicant's son was proved to have been III exclusive and conscious possession of the fire arm and ammunitions, and (iii) also that the prosecution has failed to prove that what was with the accused applicant was the fire -arm and ammunitions as defined in the Indian Arms Act. Land counsel for the State however supported the findings of the Courts below and fully justified both on facts as well as in law.