ORDER :-This application in revision raises the question whether an Additional District Magistrate can sanction a prosecution under S. 39 of the Arms Act without being empowered by the State Government to do so.

2. The applicant was convicted under S. 25 of the Arms Act by the trying Magistrate and his conviction was upheld by the Sessions Judge. It is not in dispute that the sanction on the basis of which the prosecution started had been given by an Additional District Magistrate, and the learned Assistant Government Advocate has, after enquiry, state before me that the Additional District Magistrate, who sanctioned the prosecution, had not been directed or empowered by the State Government to Act under S. 39 of the Arms Act.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the Additional District Magistrate was incompetent to accord the sanction. This point was raised before the trying Magistrate as well, but he took the view that since under Rule 2(f) of the Arms Rules, 1962 a District Magistrate includes, in relation to any district or part thereof, an Additional District Magistrate, the sanction in the present case was valid. The Magistrate was evidently wrong

Click Here to Read the rest of this document