DILIP MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THE short question which has been raised on behalf of the petitioner is as to whether the trial of the petitioner for an offence under Section 3/5 of the Explosive Substance Act is sustainable in law for want of sanction by the appropriate authority as defined under Section 7 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act").

(3.) IT appears that at time of framing charge, this question was raised before the trial court and the trial court refused the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. On perusal of the materials on -record, it appears that no sanction has been accorded by the Central Government as required by Section 7 of the Act for prosecution of the petitioner for offence under Section 3/5 of the Act. From perusal of Annexure -1 it is manifestly clear that the prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offence under the Explosive Substance Act has been sanctioned by the District Magistrate, Sahebganj.