The prosecution must establish that the articles seized from an accused person are "ammunition" and "arms" within the meaning of the Arms Act, and that the police officer had the authority to arrest the accused person under the relevant provisions of the Act.

JUDGMENT -These three revisions can be disposed of by this common judgment.

2. All the three applicants are residents of village Pachori, taluq Burhanpur, district East Nimar of Madhya Pradesh State. They have been found guilty under section 3 read with section 25 (a) of the Arms Act, 1959 hereinafter called the Act, for having been found at village Ambaparwa possessing what is styled by the prosecution as revolver and certain ammunitions.

3. Briefly stated the facts are that P. S. I. Punjabrao was attached to Khamgaon Police Station. He had found Tarasing and Baryamsing having in possession of some hand-made pistols in October 1971 and pursuant to the information he proceeded to village Ambaparwa which is on the border of the two States, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. He was accompanied bysombhaji andsomad, two police constables. Having got down at the Dak Bungalow at Ambaparwa, it is the case of the prosecution that constablesombhaji andsomad were sent to the village of the accused in Madhya Pradesh by crossing the border and they were asked to get the accused at Ambaparwa on the pretext that there were prospective purchasers for their pistols and ammunitions. A panch from village Bawanbir by name Sukhdeo was also kept ready to witness the incident. According to the prosecution thus Punjabrao laid a trap and eventually on thesoy ofsombhaji, it is stated that these accused applicants came to Ambaparwa and they were possessed of the articles like country-made pistols and certain cartridges. Seizures were effected which are filed in the respective cases started against these three accused. Eventually after the seizures, F. I. R. was lodged and these accused along with 3 others were put up for trial for offences under sections 3 and 5 read with section 25 (a) and (c) respectively of thesoid Act. The present applicants have only been convicted for possessing the so-called pistols and, ammunitions at village Ambaparwa when they were apprehended by P S. I. Punjabrao, under section 33 read with section 25 (a) of the Act. That conviction is under challenge.

4. The first question is whether prosecution has ledsotisfactory evidence to show that the articles seized in all these three cases by P. S. I. Punjabrao do answer the definition of the term "ammunition" under section 2 (1) (b) as well the definition of "arms" contained in section 2 (1) (c). Evidence on this point is only that of Punjabrao. For the reasons best known the prosecution have not got these arms tested nor the so-called ammunition certified from any Ballistic Expert. Before the Courts below too, this question was raised but thesome has been answered relying upon the testimony of Punjabrao.

5. The accused have denied not only the seizure but also the allegations that these articles were either "arms" or "ammunition". The· seizure which is identical in these cases and panchanamas effected maybe briefly noted which merely described what was the articles and the manner stating that it was a hand-made pistol having a tubular like projection, a trigger and a handrest. It does not describe whether thesome was in a working condition or even whether the trigger was capable of ejecting any ammunition from the projection prescribed as a small projecting iron tube. In panchanama the article is described as pistol and the ammunition as kadtoos. These facts are all challenged and questioned.

6. Evidence of Punjabrao is to the effect which is pressed by the prosecution for acceptance that he being a police officer, he states that pistol can be used for firing ammunition. Except the statement, he does not refer to the articles seized specifically in the case against Guljarsing. In the case against applicant Fulsing, he states that the cartridge is alive and the material seized is used for manufacturing pistols. The pistol can be used as a fire-arm. As. to the panchanama and the seizure, the description is in similar terms. It was put to him that material seized by him was usable in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document