LAWS(PVC)-1907-6-18

EMPEROR Vs. SATISH CHANDRA ROY

Decided On June 19, 1907
EMPEROR Appellant
V/S
SATISH CHANDRA ROY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the government of Eastern Bengal and Assam in a prosecution under the Indian Arms Act (XI of 1878). The question raised is one of general importance, as it involves the interpretation of Section 4 of the Act. Does a sword-stick come within the definition of the word arms? That word, according to its definition, includes "fire-arms, bayonets, swords, daggers, spears, spear-heads and bows and arrows, and also cannon and parts of arms." The denotation is neither exhaustive nor altogether happy, but we are now only concerned with the words swords and daggers.

(2.) The dagger is a weapon which in relation to its comparatively short blade may be considered a diminutive sword. The word sword is a generic description. It is difficult, as a matter of verbal, definition, to distinguish the sword from smaller hand-weapons. An ordinary sword may be four or five times as long as an ordinary dagger. There are also long daggers and short swords. The length of the blade is no criterion of the name to be applied. Neither will the form of the blade, nor the handle, afford any certain test. The breadth of the blade is also no guide.

(3.) The shape of the sword has varied considerably in different countries and ages. A sword may be straight or curved; it may be short or long. Whatever can be used as an instrument of attack or defence for cutting as well as for thrusting, and is not an ordinary implement for domestic purposes, comes within the meaning of the statute.