Sariful Alam vs State Of West Bengal
2022 Latest Caselaw 2919 Cal

Sl. No. 26



                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi
                      And
The Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

                                 C.R.A. 413 of 2016
                                  CRAN 2 of 2022

                                   Sariful Alam
                                        -Vs-
                                State of West Bengal


For the Appellant           :         Mr. Pratip Kr. Chatterjee


For the State               :         Mr. Anwar Hossain


Heard on                    :         11.05.202, 17.05.2022


Judgement on                :         17.05.2022


Joymalya Bagchi, J. :-


        Appellant has assailed the judgment and order dated 22.03.2016

passed by the learned trial court to the extent it directs seized fire arm

being SBBL 12 Bore          gun with trade mark kolsee Gun Works having

registration no. 27642-11 and ammunition.

        I have gone through the evidence on record as well as the impugned

order of acquittal.
                                      2



      In the trial, accuseds Motiur Rahaman (father of the appellant),

Humayun Kabir, Karim Sk and Julphikar Sk @ Mithu were charged as

follows :

      "that all of you in furtherance of common intention on 4.2.2012 at

about 1 p.m. fired from your licensed gun aiming to Sonora Bibi, Somerun

Bibi and Merina Bibi to kill them, with such intention or knowledge that if

by that act you all had caused their deaths you all would have been guilty

of murder and thereby you committed an offence punishable under section

307/34 of the IPC and within (3) the cognizance of the court of sessions."

      From the evidence led during trial it appears that a single gun with

four ammunitions were recovered from the house of Motiur Rahaman,

father of the appellant. There is no evidence that the gun was fired in the

course of incident. In conclusion of trial, learned trial judge acquitted the

accused persons including Motiur Rahaman. But by the impugned order,

trial court mechanically directed confiscation of the seized alamat

including the fire arm and ammunition belonging to the appellant. Being

aggrieved by the order of confiscation, appellant initially filed an

application before the trial court seeking return of the fire arm which came

to be dismissed on 27.4.2016. A revision petition being CRR 1864 of 2016

was filed before this court which was disposed of vide order dated

15.6.2016

giving liberty to the appellant to seek appropriate remedy by way

of appeal under section 454 Cr.P.C. Hence the present appeal.

Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate for the appellant submits that the

fire arm and ammunition belongs to him and the same may be returned.

This court called upon the State to file a report with regard to the

plea of the appellant. Report has been placed on record which shows that

the appellant is the licence holder of the gun bearing no. 135/DMK issued

by District Magistrate Rambar (J & K) PP but there was no application for

entry in the office of the District Magistrate, Murshidabad.

From the materials on record it appears that the gun was seized on

16.2.2012. Immediately prior to the seizure the licence of the appellant had

been extended by the Additional District Magistrate Rambar till 3.3.2012.

Hence the appellant had a valid licence to possess the gun at the time of

seizure. Evidence on record does not show there was any illicit use of the

fire arm or ammunition. Hence, appellant, who is the owner of the fire arm

and ammunition is entitled to get back the said articles.

Under such circumstances, I am inclined to set aside the order of

confiscation passed by the trial court so far as it relates the fire arm and

ammunition and direct that the seized fire arm being SBBL 12 Bore gun

with trade mark kolsee Gun Works having registration no. 27642-11 with

ammunition be handed over to the appellant who within seven days of

delivery of the arm shall make appropriate application for renewal/grant of

licence before the appropriate authority failing which the authority shall be

at liberty to initiate proceeding for confiscation of the fire arm in

accordance with law.

Appeal is accordingly allowed. Connected application being CRAN 2

of 2022 stands disposed of.

Lower court records along with copies of this judgment be sent down

at once to the learned trial Court as well as the Superintendent of

Correctional Home for necessary compliance.

Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the

parties on priority basis on compliance of all formalities.

I agree.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)                             (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)




tkm