RAM BRICH Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ram Brich, applicant was convicted by a Magistrate of the First Class under Section 19(f), Arms Act, and was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge affirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence of imprisonment from six months to one month and maintained the sentence of fine.

(2.) On the finding recorded by the Courts below the consideration of the case must be approached on the assumption that a spear-head was, on the search of the house of the applicant, recovered from a room in the occupation of the applicant. In other words the applicant was in possession of a spear-head. The question however remains whether the possession of a spear-head could justify the conviction of the applicant under Section 19(f), Arms Act. It is clear from a perusal of Schedule 2, of the Indian Arms Rules, 1924, that the prohibitions and directions contained in the Arms Act (Act No. 11 of 1878) have no application in the United Provinces to spears, spear-heads, swords, etc. But by the same schedule the Local Government is authorized, by means of a Notification in the local Official Gazette, to retain all or any of the prohibitions and directions contained in the Act in respect of any arms in the case of any class of persons or of any specified area. In pursuance of the power vested in the Local Government the Governor in Council, by Notification No. 10-N/VIII, dated 9 May 1934, published in the United Provinces Gazette dated 12 May 1934, was pleased to direct that the exclusion from the operation of all the prohibitions and directions contained in the Indian Arms Act was cancelled in the Ghazipur district: In respect of spears, swords and sword sticks in the possession of all persons other than such persons as were exempted in respect of these weapons...

(3.) The applicant is a resident of Ghazipur district and was in possession of the spearhead in that district. But it is contended on his behalf that as the said Notification has no reference to spear-heads his conviction is bad in law. In my judgment this contention is well founded and ought to prevail. It is provided by Section 4, Arms Act, that unless there be something repugnant in the subject or context the word "arms" in the Act includes fire-arms, bayonets, swords, daggers, spears, spear-heads, and bows and arrows, also cannon and parts of arms and machinery for manufacturing arms.