The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a license to possess firearms and the prohibition on acquiring or keeping prohibited arms and ammunition without a license under the Arms Act.

K.S. Jhaveri, J.

1. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant - State Ms. C.M. Shah and learned Advocate for the respondents Mr. Dharmesh D. Nanavaty/Mr. Premal S. Rachh.

2. By way of this Appeal, the State has felt aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.11.2005 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No. 170/2001 whereby the respondents herein were acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1)(1A) and 25(1)(1AA) of the Arms Act.

3. The case in brief and the incident which is alleged to have occurred on 12.04.1988 is as under:--

3.1. The complainant PSI Parakramsinh Kanubha Jadeja was discharging his duty as PSI at LCB Police Station, Jamnagar. Police Inspector Mr. C.B. Gandhi as well as other staff members of LCB Police Station were on patrol on the Jamnagar-Khambaliya Highway. On the said day at about 12.15 pm, one Maruti Car bearing Registration No. GJ-6A-3587 passed over this road. A signal was given but the said car did not stop. The police therefore, followed the said car and it was stopped near a hotel. The police personnel enquired about the registration papers of the said car, but the same were not found and therefore, a search was carried out. Necessary interrogation was done and during the said interrogation, one coloured pouch containing one pistol - 0.0380 caliber as well as pouches of cartridges were found below the seat of the driver. Upon being asked about the necessary permit, the said was denied by the accused No. 1. Thereafter, the panchnama was drawn, the accused was detained and a complaint was filed by the complainant.

3.2. Further investigation of the case was handed over to Police Inspector Mr. C.B. Gandhi and during investigation, it was revealed that the weapon in question was received by accused No. 1 from accused No. 2 and accused No. 2 had received the said weapon from the accused No. 3. Therefore, the accused No. 2 and 3 were also detained and investigated by the police. The pistol as well as cartridges were sent to F.S.L. for further investigation. Necessary statements of the panch witnesses were recorded. Further investigation was carried out and on completion of the investigation, the accused were charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences.

3.3. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried, so far as the accused of Sessions Case No. 170/2001. Therefore, the prosecution led evidence and on the conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Jamnagar passed the order as above.

3.4. At the time of the trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:--

Particulars	Exhibit
Panch Harendrabhai Harjibhai Jhala	17
Panch Jayraj Madhudan Chandra	18
Panch Arvindsinh Dilubha Jadeja	19
Panch Mahedrasinh Chandubha	31
Panch Ramde Ranmal	32
Panch Baldevsinh Viramsinh Chavda	33
Panch Nathuram Amardas	35
Panch Kantilal Narandas Kotecha	36
Panch Vinodbhai Veljibhai	37
Panch Dilipbhai Karshanbhai Parmar	42
Panch Samir Adambhai Bhaiya	43
Panch Vasant Nathubhai Rathod	44
Panch Iqbal Ganibhai	45
PSO Tejubaha Lakhubha Jadeja	46
Complaint PSI Parakramsinh Kanubha Jadeja	48
Executive Magistrate Hitendra Ratilal Kalaiya	59
Police Witness Navalsinh Mahobatsinh Parmar	62
Panch Bharat Mohanbhai	63
Deputy Mamlatdar Mamad Husain Osman	68
PSO Karshanbhai Govindbhai Parmar	69
Panch Sukhdevsinh Ranjitsinh Rana	72
Mansukhlal Bhagwanji Amrutiya	77
Sanatbhai Managlal Dave (Employee at the Office of the Collector)	82
Police Witness Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Gohil	95
Chandrakant Bachulal Gandhi	111

The prosecution also rel