Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Gurjit Singh Sandhu – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case and fir details (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding possession of cartridges (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. state's contention on possession issues (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. previous case law on conscious possession (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. applicability of previous rulings to current case (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. conclusion on the validity of the fir (Para 21) |
| 7. final order dismissing the petition (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeks quashing of FIR No. 46/2021 dated 10.02.2021, registered at Police Station I.G.I. Airport, New Delhi, for an offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959.
2. The facts in brief, leading to the present case are as follows:
i. The petitioner, is a Canadian citizen, who also holds an Overseas Citizen of India card. He arrived in Delhi from Canada on 09.02.2021 and was supposed to catch a connecting flight from New Delhi to Amritsar on 10.02.2021.
ii. It is stated that during the check-in at the IGI Airport, New Delhi, the baggage of the petitioner was found
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of conscious possession and the need for the accused to establish lack of awareness or inadvertent possession to avoid trial in ....
Conscious possession is required for prosecution under the Arms Act; mere recovery of a cartridge without knowledge does not establish a violation.
Possession of ammunition under Section 25 of the Arms Act requires conscious possession, and a single live cartridge without a firearm may not constitute an offense if the possession is not conscious....
Possession of ammunition under the Arms Act requires consciousness or knowledge; inadvertent packing does not constitute an offense.
A person is not liable under Section 25 of the Arms Act if not consciously in possession of ammunition, without any firearm or threat present.
Conscious possession under the Arms Act requires awareness and intent; mere physical possession does not constitute an offense if the possessor lacks knowledge of the contraband's presence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
