Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the appellant against his conviction by the Designated Court, Sangrur, under Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 5 of the TADA Act. The appellant was found in possession of a .22 bore pistol along with 25 live cartridges. The Designated Court based its conviction on the testimonies of Inspector Sant Kumar and ASI Darshan Singh, who confirmed that the appellant was apprehended with the loaded pistol. The court noted that 10 cartridges were loaded in the pistol, and despite the absence of test firing, the evidence presented was sufficient to establish that the weapon was in working order. The court found no discrepancies in the cross-examination of the witnesses regarding the identity and condition of the weapon. The court concluded that the appellant was rightly convicted for possessing the firearm without a license, especially since it was found in a notified area, thus justifying the conviction under the TADA Act as well. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Possession of Illegal Arms - Conviction Validity - Arms Act, 1959, Section 25; TADA Act, 1987, Section 5 - Appellant was found in possession of a .22 bore pistol and live cartridges without a permit. The court upheld the conviction based on the evidence of police officers who confirmed the weapon's working condition, despite it not being test-fired. Held that the conviction was justified under both Acts (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 5 of the TADA Act was justified based on the evidence presented.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 5 of the TADA Act based on the evidence presented.
Law Points
- Possession of illegal arms
- Conviction under TADA Act
- Evidence evaluation
