The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of the Arms Act and the CrPC to determine the classification of the offence as bailable or non-bailable.

Herd Mr J.M. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr N. Mahammad, learned public prosecutor, I have also perused the case diary.

2. According to the FIR lodged in this case of 9.7.2001 at about 1300 hrs. one No. of 22 inch live round was recovered from the accused petitioner Mr Vanrammawia Lailet of Indian Airlines Flight No. IC-230, seat No. 2IF bound to Kolkata during his physical checking by CISF personnel at pre-embarkation check area without having any valid licence. A case u/s 25(lB)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959 was registered. The offence thereunder is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years. Mr J.M. Choudhury, learned senior counsel submits that such an offence is bailable in view of, the Apex Court decision in Rejeev Choudhury-Vs-State (NCT) of Delhi 2001(2) Crimes 303(SC) wherein it has been held:

"5. From the relevant part of the aforesaid sections, it is apparent that pending investigation relating to an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term 'not less than 10 years," the Magistrate is empowered to authorise the detention of the accused in custody for not more than 90 days. For rest of the offences, period prescribed in 60 days. Hence in ceases, where offence is punishable with imprisonment for 10 years or more, accused could be detained up to a period of 90 days. In this context, the expression "not less than" would mean imprisonment should be 10 years or more and would covetously these offenses for which punishment could be imprisonment for a clear period of 10 years or more. Under Section 386 punishment provided is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and also fine. That means, imprisonment can be for a clear period of 10 years or less. Hence, it could not be said that minimum sentence would be 10 years or more. Further, in context also if we consider Clause (i) of proviso (a) to Section 167(2), it would be applicable in case where investigation relates to an offence punishable (1) with death; (2) imprisonment for life; and (3) imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years. It would not cover the offence for which punishment could be imprisonment for less than 10 years. Under Section 386 of the IPC, imprisonment can vary from minimum to maximum of 10 years and it cannot be said that imprisonment prescribed is not less than 10 years."

3. As per first Schedule (II) to the CrPC as regards classification of offences under IPC, an offence punishable with imprisonment for less than three years is bailable. Mr Choudhury, learned senior counsel submits that the expression "imprisonment for less than three years" are to be construed as imprisonment which may extend to three years and in that view of the matter the offence u/s 25(1 B)(a) of the Arms Act is a bailable offence and the accused petitioner can be claim bail as a matter of right. The accused petitioner Varrammawia Lailet, arrested in connection with Azara PS Case No. 577 2001 u/s 25(lB)(a) of Arms Act, is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati. Return the case diary. This disposes of this bail application.