Writ petition seeking quashing of FIR registered under Section 25 Arms Act where recovered cartridges belonged to valid license holder. Quashed proceedings due to lack of prima facie evidence of conscious possession.
FIR No. 182/2018 under Section 25 Arms Act and proceedings therefrom quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~36
VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Rajeev Kumar and Mr. Akshay Vyas, Advocates
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing Counsel for State with SI Vipin Kumar, PS IGI Airport
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 20.08.2018
Page 1 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 1775/2018
"The possession of a firearm under the Arms Act must have, firstly the element of consciousness or knowledge of that possession in the person charged with such offence and secondly, where he has not the actual physical possession, he has nonetheless a power or control over that weapon so that his possession thereon continues besides physical possession being in someone else. The first pre-condition for an offence under Section 25(1)(a) is the element of intention, consciousness or knowledge with which a person possessed the firearm before it can be said to constitute an offence and secondly that possession need not be physical possession but can be constructive, having power and control over the gun, while the person to whom physical possession is given holds it subject to that power and control. In any disputed question of possession, specific facts admitted or proved alone will establish the existence of the de facto relation of control or the dominion of the person over it necessary to determine whether that person was or was not in possession of the thing in question. In this view it is difficult to postulate as to what the evidence will be. If the possession of the appellant includes the constructive possession of the firearm in question then even though he had parted with physical possession on the date when it was recovered, he will nonetheless be deemed to be in possession of that firearm. If so, the charge that he was in possession of the revolver does not suffer from any defect particularly when he is definitely informed in that charge that he had control over that revolver"
Page 2 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 1775/2018
State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy & Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 522]
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
AUGUST 20, 2018 ‘vn’
Page 3 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 1775/2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash FIR under Section 25 Arms Act when petitioner holds valid license but ammunition remained in his bag inadvertently.
Whether lack of conscious possession regarding cartridges found during hand baggage screening warrants quashing of proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gunwantlal v. State of Madhya PradeshReferred¶14
(1972) 2 SCC 194 · Who else cites this
State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy & Anr.Referred¶19
State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy & Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 522 · Who else cites this
Gaganjot Singh v. StateExplained¶20
Gaganjot Singh v. State W.P.(CRL.) 1169/2014
Juan Manuel Sanchez Rosas v. State through NCT Delhi & Anr.Referred¶21
Juan Manuel Sanchez Rosas v. State through NCT Delhi & Anr., Crl.M.C.2642/2014
Jaswinder Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.Referred¶21
Jaswinder Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr., Crl.M.C. 4207/2014
Sonam Chaudhary v. The StateReferred¶21
Sonam Chaudhary v. The State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) Crl.M.C.471/2015
2 provisions across 2 enactments
VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA
STATE NCT OF DELHI
MUKTA GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
