Delhi High Court
Ved Prakash Mishra vs State Through: P.S. Igi Airport on 11 July, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 11, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1158/2019 & CRL.M.A. 4500/2019
VED PRAKASH MISHRA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manish Vashisht, Advocate.
Versus
STATE THROUGH: P.S. IGI AIRPORT ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Rajiv Gulati.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 211/2018, under Sections 25/54/59 of Arms
Act, 1959 registered at Police Station IGI Airport, Delhi is sought in this
case, while relying upon Supreme Court's decision in 'Anand Kumar
Mohatta and Anr. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi Department of Home
and Anr' 2018(14) SCALE 756.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner himself was
unaware of the presence of 4 live cartridges in his hand bag at the time of
his travel. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that it was an act of sheer
negligence on his part and he ought to have checked the handbag before
leaving for the airport. It is pointed out that petitioner was travelling to
Lucknow from Delhi on an official work for Competition Commission of
India (herein after referred to as the Commission) being the Director
(Law) of the Commission in a matter which was suddenly reflected in the
cause-list of the Hon'ble High Court. So, it is submitted that there was no
intention on his part to commit offence under Sections 25/54/59 of the
Arms Act, 1959.
Perusal of status report reveals that petitioner had valid arms
license for the weapon in question. The pertinent observations of
Supreme Court in 'Anand Kumar Mohatta (Supra) are as under:-
"There is nothing in the words of this Section which
restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the
abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the
stage of the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High court
can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C even
when the discharge application is pending with the trial court.
Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated
against a person can be interfered with at the stage of FIR but
not if it has advanced, and the allegations have materialized
into a charge sheet. On the contrary it could be said that the
abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR
has taken the form of a charge sheet after investigation. The
power is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of
power of any court".
Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR of this case, status
report and the decision cited, I find that petitioner was not in
conscious possession of 4 live cartridges found in his baggage at IGI
Airport, Delhi. Applying the dictum of Supreme Court's decision in
'Anand Kumar Mohatta (Supra) to the facts of this case, I find that
continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would
be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of
₹50,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with Prime Minister's National
Relief Fund within a week from today. Upon placing on record the
proof of deposit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its
copy to the Investigating Officer, FIR No. 211/2018, under Sections
25/54/59 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station IGI Airport,
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 11, 2019
p'ma
