Conviction for illegal possession of firearms upheld, resulting in a three-year sentence; bail granted pending appeal based on the consideration of petitioner's custody history.

JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 19.03.2024 passed by Shri Shyam Nandan Tiwari, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur (Deoghar) in Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2023 by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.11.2022 passed by Sri Amit Kumar Vaish, learned A.C.J.M, Madhurpur in connection with G.R Case No. 269/2007 corresponding to Karon P.S. Case No. 50/2007 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 25 (1-B) a of the Arms Act and Section 26(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for three (03) years each and to pay the fine of Rs. 10,000/- each respectively.

I.A No. 2863 of 2025

2. I.A No. 2863 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgments and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that false recovery of firearms has been shown against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since long. However, learned counsel for the petitioner could not say the exact date of custody of the petitioner but he had submitted that the petitioner was in custody when the learned Trial Court i.e. the Court of A.C.J.M, Madhupur had passed the impugned judgment and sentence on 24.11.2022 and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. It is submitted that the impugned judgments and sentence passed by the learned Courts below are fit and proper and no interference is required. It is submitted there is recovery of firearms from the petitioner and hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected.

6. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and while going through the Lower Court Records, it appears that the F.I.R was lodged against the petitioner on 24.06.2007 under Section 25 (1-B) a/26 of Arms Act and the police had submitted charge sheet against the petitioner under Section 25 (1-B) a/26 of Arms Act on 28.08.2007.

7. It appears from the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned A.C.J.M, Madhupur on 24.11.2022 that the petitioner was produced on the strength of production warrant from Karo P.S. Case No. 46/2007 instituted under Section 364 A of I.P.C and he was awarded punishment of R.I for three (03) years under Section 25 (1-B) a of the Arms Act and also for the offence under Section 26 (1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for three (03) years each and to pay the fine of Rs. 10,000/- each respectively on 24.11.2022.

8. It further appears that the learned Appellate Court below while dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2023 vide order dated 19.03.2024 has not discussed as to whether the petitioner was on bail or not? Even the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur has simply dismissed the appeal on merit.

9. From perusal of Vakalatnama filed in this case by the petitioner, it appears that the same was issued by the Jailor, L.J.N, Central Jail, Hazaribagh on 22.08.2024 and which shows his custody since 22.08.2024 in this case.

10. It appears that initially the petitioner was remanded in this case on 07.07.2007 and he was released on bail on 20.06.2008 in the light of order dated 08.05.2008 in B.A No. 2108 of 200