Jagbeer Singh vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6084 Ker

Crl.A.No.1555/2019                     1



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
    WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                          CRL.A NO. 1555 OF 2019
         CRIME NO.503/2012 OF CBCID, MALAPPURAM, Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CP 61/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                         OF FIRST CLASS ,NILAMBUR
SC 50/2014 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - III,
                MANJERI / III ADDITIONAL MACT, MANJERI
APPELLANT/1st ACCUSED:

             JAGBEER SINGH,
             AGED 53 YEARS,
             S/O.BHARATH SINGH, FARMANA VILLAGE, FARMANA P.O.,
             KARKOSA TALUK, SONIPATH DISTRICT, HARYANA.

             BY ADVS.
             PHILIP T.VARGHESE
             SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
             SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
             SMT.V.T.LITHA


RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

     1       STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

     2       THE DETECTIVE INSPECTOR OF CBCID,
             MALAPPURAM 676 505.


      THIS    CRIMINAL    APPEAL   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.A.No.1555/2019                  2




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is the 1st accused in S.C.No.50 of 2014 on

the file of the Additional Sessions Court III, Manjeri, has filed this

Criminal Appeal challenging the judgment passed in the said case,

only to the extent the MO1 pistol was directed to be confiscated

along with MO2 series of bullets. In the trial conducted by the

Sessions Court, all the accused including the petitioner were found

not guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 109

read with Section 34 IPC. Even though the appellant was acquitted,

it was ordered that MO1 pistol and MO2 series bullets are to be

confiscated and the same shall be sent to the nearest Arsenal for

disposal, once the appeal period is over. This appeal is filed

challenging the said order.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant brought my

attention to the fact that, the direction to confiscate the MO1 and

MO2 were ordered by the learned Sessions Judge only on the

ground that the validity of the license in respect of the MO1 pistol

expired on 16.12.2012. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies

on the license issued by the authorities concerned which is

produced as Annexure-A. On perusal of the same, it is seen that the

license issued in favour of the petitioner, stand extended upto

05.04.2022. The learned counsel submits that the period of license

is extended subsequently.

4. Considering the fact that the confiscation was ordered

only because of the fact that the license of the pistol stood expired,

the said finding is liable to be interfered with, as the license already

stand renewed. In such circumstances, I am inclined to allow this

Criminal Appeal by setting aside the judgment dated 31.01.2018

passed by the Addl.Sessions Court-III, Manjeri in S.C.No.50 of 2014

to the extend it ordered the confiscation of MO1 pistol and MO2

series of bullets.

In the light of the above order, the petitioner shall be at liberty

to approach the learned Sessions Judge by filing an application

under Section 452 Cr.P.C. seeking release of the aforesaid articles

along with the subsisting license for the MO1 pistol. If such

application is submitted, the same shall be considered by the

learned Sessions Judge in accordance with law as expeditiously as

possible. It is also clarified that in case the MOs were already sent

to the Arsenal, the learned Sessions Judge may direct the return of

the same, provided the said articles are not disposed of already.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE DG/2.6.22