Emperor vs Sikhdar - 1931 Supreme(All) 332

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1931 Supreme(All) 332

BENNET
Emperor – Appellant
Versus
Sikhdar – Respondent

ORDER

Bennet, J. - This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Fatehpur asking that the conviction of one Sikhdar for illegal possession of a gun without a licence u/s 19(f), Arms Act, should be set aside. The facts found by the learned Sessions Judge are that the gun in question was found in the house of this accused, but the recommendation is made on the ground that not only the accused lives in this house but some other members of the joint family of which the accused is a member, and that the accused is not the managing member. The joint family in question consists of the father of the accused, who appeared as a witness and denied that there was a gun in the house, and he is an old man aged 60, and he stated that he cannot see distinctly. The Magistrate is apparently right in his conclusion that the father would have anything to do personally with this gun. Of the two brothers of the accused one Purna is said to live in another village called Nathkhera. Another brother Jethwa apparently lives in the house with the accused and Jethwa is said to be older than the accused. The learned Sessions Judge referred to a ruling of this Court of the year 1893: Queen Empress v. Sang

Click Here to Read the rest of this document