STATE OF HARYANA Vs. KALA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State of Haryana is aggrieved against the acquittal of Kala Singh recorded by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa, on 22.1.1997 and has preferred present appeal against the acquittal. Accused/respondent Kala Singh was found in possession of one actuated knife having length of 6 inches. Recovery was effected on 28.6.1994.

(2.) Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa, on 22.1.1997, acquitted the accused/respondent on the ground that sanction to prosecute accused/respondent was not obtained by the prosecution from the District Magistrate as the same was mandatory. Mr. Deepak Jindal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, appearing for the appellant, has stated that under Section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "1959 Act") sanction is required in respect of offence under Section 3 of 1959 Act and not for any other offence. According to the counsel, Section 3 of 1959 Act only relates to possession of fire arms and ammunition. It is stated that since accused/respondent was not found in possession of any fire arms or ammunition, therefore, for recovery of knife, his case will fall under Section 4 of 1959 Act. He has brought into my notice notification bearing No. S.O.127/C.A.54/59/S.4/78 dated 15.9.1978 issued by the Haryana Government whereby all persons are prohibited for having in their possession spring actuated knife. It is stated that no sanction was required, therefore, the judgment of trial Court regarding acquittal of the accused on this score is liable to be set aside. The accused/respondent, on 14.11.1994, was charged for offence under Section 25/54/59 of 1959 Act.

(3.) In the present appeal against acquittal, notice was issued and record was requisitioned.