The Additional District Magistrate, invested with the powers of a District Magistrate, could validly grant sanction under S.29 of the Arms Act. The appellate court cannot interfere with an order of acquittal without substantial reasons.

1. This appeal is filed by the State against the order passed by the Sessions Judge of Kozhikode acquitting the accused who had been convicted by the Dist. Magistrate of Kozhikode for an offence under

S.19(f) of the Indian Arms Act.

2. On 16-1-60 Pw-1 a Headconstable attached to Kodancherry police outpost proceeded for a prohibition raid. He searched the house of the accused and from inside the house an unlicensed gun M.O.1 was recovered. Pw. 2 was present at the time of the search and recovery and has attested Ex. P-1. The Sub Inspector after obtaining sanction from the Addl. Dist. Magistrate launched the prosecution against the accused.

3. The learned Dist. Magistrate accepted the evidence of Pw-1 regarding the recovery of the unlicensed gun and convicted the accused. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge was not prepared to accept the uncorroborated testimony of the Headconstable, Pw-2 having turned hostile. The learned judge found that the prosecution had not succeeded in proving that the accused had in his possession or under his control M.O.1. He also held that sanction for the prosecution was not given by a competent authority as contemplated under S.29 of the Arms Act and that the trial was hence bad. The conclusions of the learned Sessions Judge on both these points have been challenged in this appeal.

4. A valid sanction under S.29 of the Arms Act is an essential prerequisite for the initiation of the proceedings and proceedings initiated without such a sanction will vitiate the entire trial and the defect of jurisdiction cannot be cured under S.537 Crl. P.C. The argument raised by the learned counsel for the defence is that the Additional District Magistrate who had accorded sanction in this case cannot be considered as a Magistrate of the district who alone is authorised under S.29 to grant sanction and since such a person has not accorded sanction the whole trial is rendered illegal and the conviction and sentence cannot be maintained.

5. S.29 of the Arms Act reads as follows:

"Where an offence punishable under S.19, clause (f) has been committed ... no proceedings shall be instituted against any person in respect of such offence without the previous sanction of the Magistrate of the district or, in a presidency town, of the Commissioner of Police."

6. We have now to see the provisions of S.10 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The relative portion of S.10, Crl. Procedure Code is as follows:

"(1) In Every district outside the Presidency-towns the State Government shall appoint a Magistrate of the First Class, who shall be called the District Magistrate.

(2) The State Government may appoint any Magistrate of the first class to be an Additional District Magistrate and such Additional District Magistrate shall have all or any of the powers of a District Magistrate under this Code, or under any other law for the time being in force, as the State Government may direct.

xxx xxx xxx xxx

S.10 (2) Cr. P. C., distinctly shows that the State Government may appoint any Magistrate of the first class to be an Additional District Magistrate who will have the power or any of the powers of the District Magistrate under the Crl. Procedure Code or under any other law for the time being in force as the State Government may direct. The Additional District Magistrate who granted sanction in this case has by notification been invested with all the powers as contemplated within the scope of Sub-section (2) of S.10. Such a person so appointed could, not only exercise the powers of the District Magistrate under the Criminal Procedure Code, but also under any other law for the time being in force. The Indian Arms Act is a law in force at the time and therefore the Additional District Magistrate invested with the powers of a District Magistrate under S.10 (2) could exercise the powers of the Dist. Magistrate under S.29 of the Arms Act to accord sanction for prosecution.

7. This question whether the Addl. District Magistrate could grant sanction