Introduction

Para 1-2:

• Criminal appeal under the Supreme Court arising from FIR No. 477/2022.
• Appellant seeks quashing of FIR under Sections 25, 54, and 59 of the Arms Act for possession of a buttondar knife.

Facts and Allegations

Para 3:

• FIR alleged that the appellant was found with a buttondar knife in a public park.
• Knife dimensions: blade length 14.5 cm, width 3 cm, handle length 17 cm.

Para 4-5:

• Knife dimensions did not fall within the prohibited category under the Arms Act, 1959 and Arms Rules, 2016.
• Prohibition under the DAD Notification (29th October 1980) applied only to possession for “manufacture, sale, or test.”

Legal Submissions and Issues

Para 6-7:

• No evidence in the charge-sheet indicated the knife was intended for sale or test as per the DAD Notification.
• Notification requires specific conditions (manufacture, sale, or test) to constitute an offense.

Evidence and Investigative Findings

Para 8-10:

• Charge-sheet lacked allegations or evidence linking the possession to prohibited activities under the Arms Act or DAD Notification.
• Investigating officer failed to demonstrate intent or purpose beyond mere possession.

Judgment Analysis

Para 11-13:

• High Court’s rejection of the quashing petition failed to address the lack of ingredients for an offense.
• Supreme Court found the prosecution’s evidence insufficient to proceed with a trial.

Para 14-15:

• The charge-sheet did not establish any offense under the Arms Act.
• FIR, charge-sheet, and proceedings quashed as they constituted an abuse of process.

Key Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Arms Act, 1959

   • Sections 25, 54, and 59: Deal with unlawful possession and use of arms.

2. Arms Rules, 2016

   • Rule 3 and Schedule I, Category V: Define prohibited dimensions for sharp-edged weapons.

3. DAD Notification (29th October 1980)

   • Prohibits possession of buttondar knives exceeding specified dimensions only when intended for “manufacture, sale, or test.”

4. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

   • Section 482: Inherent powers to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of the legal process.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Mere possession of a knife with specified dimensions is not an offense unless intended for manufacture, sale, or test, as per the Arms Act and DAD Notification.
• Prosecution must present specific allegations to proceed to trial.

Subjects:

• Criminal Law: Possession of a prohibited weapon under the Arms Act.

• Arms Act 1959
• Quashing FIR
• Arms Rules 2016
• DAD Notification
• Abuse of Process
• Supreme Court Judgment