DEBA BARUA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the very outset, it has been pointed (out by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the accused revisionist Sri Deba Barua died during the pendency of the revision. The provisions of abatement of the appeal do mot apply to the criminal revision, as the conviction of the revisionist may affect the right of the family members of the deceased to receive the family pension, so the disposal of this revision on merit is necessary.

(2.) I have heard Mr. K. Agarwal. learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Mr. D.P. Saikia, learned counsel for the State.

(3.) While investigating the Koliabor PS case No. 161/88 under Section 51 (1) of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (for short, the Act) read with Section 379 IPC on receiving a secret information that a stolen Rhino horn had been consealed by the accused-revisionist, the police raided the house of the revisionist Deba Barua and in the search they recovered a large number of arms and ammunitions. After observing necessary formalities, a search memo (Exbt.1) was prepared. The seized materials were sent to the forensic laboratory. In the examination, the ammunition had been found to be fire arms both live and empty. After obtaining sanction required under Section 39 of the Arms Act the accused was put on trial. The learned Magistrate found the accused-revisionist guilty under Section 25( 1 )(a) of the Arms Act, sentenced him to 3 years RI and a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default: of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months. In appeal, the learned Sessions Judge has confirmed the conviction. Hence, title revisionist before this Court.