CRL.M.C./1036/2016 of SHAH NAWAJ RANA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+CRL.M.C. 1036/2016 & Crl.M.A.No. 4463/2016

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAKO R R%23.08.2017

By this petition under Section 482 Cr.PC, the petitioner hasprayed for quashing of FIR No. 138/2014, under Section 30 of ArmsAct, 1959 (for short ‘the Act’) at P.S. IGI Airport on the complaint ofsub-Inspector/EXE, CISF posted at IGI Airport, Terminal-3, NewDelhi.

It is noted that subsequently offence under Section 30 of theArms Act have been converted to offence under Section 25 of theArms Act.

Brief facts are that the petitioner was to fly to Dubai from IGIAirport by Jet Airways Flight No. 9W0548. On the X-ray screeningof his baggage, one live cartridge of bore 0.380 calibre was found.Petitioner failed to produce licence for carrying the said cartridge.

Accordingly, the FIR was registered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitionerhas valid Arms Licence for the arm and ammunition of bore 0.380calibre issued by concerned competent authority in the State of U.P.The said licence has been issued by Zila Parishad, Bijnaur. The saidlive cartridge which otherwise was damaged, remained in the baggageof petitioner when he started his journey from Mujaffar Nagar forgoing to Dubai. Petitioner did not notice the said live cartridge in thebaggage and had only put his clothes and other articles.Thepetitioner was not in “conscious possession” of the cartridge.It isfurther submitted that the said live cartridge, upon examination byFSL was found to be misfired cartridge and could not have been usedagain.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner holds avalid arms licence within the State of U.P. It has also been stated thatfrom the investigation, nothing had come on record to suggest thatpetitioner was in ‘conscious possession’ of the ammunition whichwas recovered from the baggage at IGI Airport.It has also beenstated that FSL found the said cartridge to be “misfired one”; meaningthereby, the same could not have been used again.

He has placed reliance on Sanjay Dutt vs. State through CBI,Bombay, (MANU/SC/0554/1994), Nurit Toker vs. The State ofMaharashtra, (2012 Bom CR (Cri) 154), William Michael Hurtubisevs. The State of Odisha and Ors. (MANU/OR/0016/2014), Gunwantlalvs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, (MANU/SC/0130/1972) andGaganjot Singh vs. State, (MANU/DE/3227/2014).

It has been held that accused was not in conscious possession ofthe cartridge. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is having validarms licence within the State of U.P. He is resident of MujjafarNagar, U.P. There is plea taken by the petitioner that the misfiredcartridge remained lying in his baggage un-noticed when he put hisclothes and other articles for undertaking journey to Dubai.

Fortheforegoingreasons,FIRandtheconsequentialproceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

The petition is disposed of.

A.K. PATHAK, J

AUGUST 23, 2017mw