THANGJAM Vs. UNION TERRITORY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Thangjam Amu Singh, was tried for an offence punishable under Section 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act, for being found in possession of a part of a gun, and another a country -made gun and was convicted by the learned A. D. M., Manipur, on a plea of guilty and sentenced to undergo R. I. for 3 months.

(2.) PETITIONER 's appeal to the learned Sessions Judge, failed and he has come up to this Court with this petition for the exorcise of its revisional jurisdiction.

(3.) BESIDES an attempt to show that the plea was not really one of guilty, and the conviction was on that score bad, it was also pointed out that the conviction was bad in any case, as there was no legal sanction in accordance with the requirements of Section 29 of the Indian Arms Act, which is necessary before a prosecution under Section 19(f) can be launched. There can be no doubt that if a previous proper sanction was not obtained the whole trial would be vitiated and because of that the conviction would be liable to be set aside, even if it is based on a plea of guilty.