Notification of weapons is essential for conviction under Section 27 of the Arms Act; absence of such notification negates the application of the statute.

JUDGMENT

Appellants are accused Nos.1 to 4 in S.C. No.160/2006 on the file of the Third Additional Sessions Judge (ADHOC), Fast Track court-I, Thrissur. The above case is charge sheeted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnamkulam police station against the appellants and one another, alleging offences punishable under Sections 452 , 324, 109 and 308 r/w. Section

34 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 .

2. Accused No.5 in the case absconded. Hence case against the 5th accused is split up. The trial court framed charges against accused Nos.1 to 4 and after trial convicted and sentenced them. Against the conviction and sentence, the accused Nos.1 to 4 preferred this appeal.

3. Prosecution case is that, the fifth accused, out of his enmity towards PW8, abetted the accused persons 1 to 4, who are goondas, for the commission of the offence of committing culpable homicide on PW8, not amounting to murder by entering into the house of PW8 having made preparation for causing hurt to PW8. In consequence of the abetment of the 5th accused, the accused persons 1 to 4 who were armed with deadly weapons, namely, iron pipes and swords, in furtherance of their common intention, barged into the house of PW8 situated at Perumannu desom in Eranellur village at 09.00 am on 14.10.2004 and thereafter, the accused persons 1 and 3 assaulted PW8 with iron pipes and the accused persons 2 and 4 assaulted PW8 with swords causing injuries to his right ring finger and left ankle. Therefore, the accused persons committed the offences punishable under the aforesaid offences.

4. To substantiate the case, prosecution examined PW1 to PW8. Exts.P1 to P8 are marked on the side of the prosecution. MO1 to MO4 material objects are marked.

Exts.D1 to D3 were marked on the side of the defence.

5. After going through the evidence and documents, trial court found that, accused Nos.1 to 4 has not committed any offence punishable under Section 308 r/w. Section 34 IPC . The trial court further found that the accused No.1 to 4 guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 324 r/w.

Section 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that, even if the entire allegations against the accused are accepted, no offence punishable under Section 452 and 324 r/w. Section 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act is made out. Learned counsel for the appellants also submitted that, no offence under is attracted in this case, because MO1 to MO4 are not notified arms as per the Arms Act, 1959 .

7. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution supports the finding of the trial court. According to the Public Prosecutor, there is nothing to be interfered with this case.

8. PW8 is the injured and PW6 is an eye witness to the incident. PW7 also deposed that, he saw a part of the incident. Ext.P1 is the wound certificate which is marked through PW1, doctor. From Ext.P1, it is clear that, the injured sustained some injures. The evidence of PW8 regarding the incident is supported by the evidence of PW6 and PW7. The medical evidence is proved through PW1 and Ext.P1 is the wound certificate. As per the wound certificate, the injured sustained a lacerated wound 7 x 2.5 cms on right ring finger and swelling left ankle.

9. Prosecution case is that, first accused delivered a blow on PW8 with an iron pipe landed on his left ankle. Further case is that the 2nd accused delivered a blow with a sword from the behind of PW8. Since PW8 turned aside, he did not sustain any injury. Further case of the prosecution is that 3rd accused delivered a blow on the left leg of PW8 with an iron pipe twice. The allegation against the 4th accused is that, he delivered a blow with a sword aiming at the head of PW8. PW8 warded off that blow with his right hand and thereby caused injury to his fingers. The above evidence is corroborated by the evidence of PW6. PW7 also deposed that, he saw the accused coming out from the house of PW