PARASMANI SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Chandi P.S. Case No. 45/98 as well as charge framed against the petitioner under Sections 25(1 -B)/26/ 35 of Arms Act by Sri A.K. Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hilsa.

(2.) ONLY submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the prosecution of the petitioner is out and out malacious and misuse of the process of the court. The petitioner on the alleged date of occurrence had valid licence of the arms (annexure -2) but in spite of that the officer -in -charge of Chandi police station lodged a case against him on the ground that the arms was not deposited by him in pursuance of the notice issued for the same. It is further submitted that the documents annexed at page 11 of the application would go to show that on the alleged date of occurrence this petitioner was in jail custody in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 271/97 and, therefore, there was no question of depositing of arms by this petitioner. Considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the first information report. On perusal of it, it appears that the notice was given to the petitioner for depositing the arms for which he had valid licence but in spite of that the petitioner did not deposit the arms. Accordingly, the aforesaid case was registered against the petitioner under Section 25(1 -B)26/35 of Arms Act. However, annexure -B at page 11 of the application would go to show that this petitioner was arrested on 6.2.1998 in connection with Chandi PS. Case No. 271/97 and on the alleged date of lodging the first information report dated 10.2.1998 this petitioner was languising in jail custody in connection with the aforesaid case.

(3.) THUS , having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case it is quite clear that the prosecution of the petitioner under the Arms Act is out and out misuse of the process of the court. No case is made out against the petitioner for prosecution under the Arms Act.