Delhi High Court quashes FIR against woman found with live cartridge
The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR against a woman, who was found carrying a live cartridge from her luggage, observing that ammunition belonged to her father, who has a valid arms license.
Justice Subramonium Prasad noted the submission of the woman petitioner whereby she had stated that the ammunition belonged to her father, Kuldeep Singh who holds a valid 32 Bore Revolver License. The arms license of Kuldeep Singh has been filed along with the petition, the Court noted.
"In the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to quash FIR No.39/2021 dated 05.02.2021 registered at Police Station IGI Airport, New Delhi for an offence under Section 25 of Arms Act 1959 and the proceedings emanating therefrom, " the Court said.
Delhi police at IGI Airport Police Station had lodged an FIR no. 0038 dated 05.02.2012 under section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, on the discovery of a live cartridge from the luggage of the Petitioner, who was traveling from Delhi to Goa, at the 4th level checking point of Terminal 3, IGI Airport.
The Petitioner at that time failed to produce any documents conferring permission to carry ammunition to her.
The girl approached Delhi High Court through Counsel Amit Sahni to quash the FIR submitting that the Petitioner's father owns a 32 Bore Revolver. Advocate Amit Sahni Advocate submitted that the Petitioner was carrying her father's bag for traveling purposes inside which a live cartridge of the father of the Petitioner was left inadvertently, without any knowledge of the Petitioner.
The father of the Petitioner later produced all relevant documents of the licensed ammunition before the IGI Airport Police Station and requested to close the FIR.
"The Petitioner was in unconscious possession of the live cartridge that was mistakenly and unknowingly left inside the bag of the Petitioner that belongs to her father who owns a licensed revolver. Moreover, the absence of any firearm with the Petitioner to project the cartridge shows that the Petitioner did not have any criminal intention of possessing the cartridge and thus does not fall under the ambit of section 25 of the Arms Act, the primary element of which is conscious or intentional possession of ammunition with the person charged under this Act," The petition read.
It was further argued by Amit Sahni, Advocate for the girl that only a single live cartridge without there being any firearm to project the cartridge itself shows that the Petitioner was not in conscious possession of the ammunition, and as such, she cannot be prosecuted under the Arms Act.
The Court agreed with the contention of advocate Amit Sahni and judgments filed by the Petitioner that there are several other orders of this Court, wherein this Court had quashed the FIR on the ground that unless the accused is not in conscious possession of the ammunition, she cannot be prosecuted for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
"There are several other orders of this Court, wherein this Court had quashed the FIR on the ground that unless the accused is not in a conscious possession of the ammunition, she cannot be prosecuted for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, " the Court noted.
(ANI)
