Delhi High Court
Kaverdeep Singh Khera vs State & Anr. on 30 October, 2019
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 30.10.2019
+ CRL.M.C. 2846/2019 & Crl.M.A. 11510/2019
KAVERDEEP SINGH KHERA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Varun Singh, Adv.
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP for State.
SI Avinash Pratap PS Chankya Puri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.
112/2016 registered at Police Station - Chankya Puri, Delhi for the offences
punishable under Section 25/54 Arms Act, 1959 and all proceedings
emanating therefrom.
2. The present petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by stating that
a complaint was received at Police Station Chankya Puri, New Delhi from
Mr.Mahesh Yadav, Sec. Coordinator at US Embassy, who while performing
duty at US Embassy Visa Gate No.6 at around 08:30 a.m., during the
physical scanning/checking, one live cartridge of 3.7 cm long and 1.5 cm
width KF.32S & W.L at the bottom of the round was detected/found in the
left pocket of the petitioner's pant. On questioning, since the petitioner
failed to produce any license for the said live cartridge, a complaint was
registered against the petitioner.
3. Thereafter the petitioner was put to joint interrogation by the Special
Cell, Delhi Police, wherein the petitioner stated that he has visited American
Embassy for seeking tourist visa for US along with his fiancée. The
petitioner further stated that live bullet was with him by mistake as he was
wearing his uncle's pant and also stated that a valid arms licence is issued to
his uncle.
4. While arguing the case for the petitioner, learned counsel for has
relied upon decision of this Court delivered in Chan Hong Saik vs. State
and Anr., 2012 (130) DRJ 504 (decided on 02.07.2012 in CRL.M.C.
3576/2011), whereby the Court opined that a single cartridge without
firearm is a minor ammunition which is protected under clause (d) of
Section 45 of the Arms Act.
5. In addition to above, learned counsel also relied upon the other cases
decided by different High Court giving the same opinion. However, the fact
remains that the judgment delivered by this Court dated 02.07.2012 was
referred to the larger Bench and vide judgment dated 06.01.2016 in case of
Dharmendra vs. State in CRL.M.C. 4493/2015, the Court opined that single
cartridge is ammunition and comes under the Arms Act, 1959.
6. The fact remains that this Court in Chan Hong Saik (Supra) quashed
the FIR by holding that a single cartridge without firearm is a minor
ammunition which is protected under clause (d) of Section 45 of the Arms
Act. The larger Bench referred above did not agree with the opinion of this
Court but however, opined that the possession of the ammunition was
unconscious and there was no arm with the accused and there was no threat
to anyone, therefore this Court has rightly quashed the FIR.
7. In the case in hand, it is not the case of the prosecution that there was
fire arm recovered from the petitioner or there was any threat to anyone at
the Airport.
8. Thus, in the present case also, the possession of the ammunition was
unconscious and there was no threat to anyone.
9. Accordingly, for the reasons afore-recorded, the FIR No. 112/2016
registered at Police Station - Chankya Puri, Delhi for the offences
punishable under Section 25/54 Arms Act, 1959 and all proceedings
emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
10. The petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
11. Dasti.
12. Pending application also stands disposed of.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 30, 2019
ab
