Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lakhanlal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 November, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
Cr.A. No. 5016/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 15th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5016 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
LAKHANLAL S/O SHRI RAMCHARAN DWIVEDI
AGE 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION PRIVATE JOB,
RESIDENT OF 177, JEEVAN KI PHEL
MALWA MILL, INDORE (M.P.)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI BANSHRAJ VISHWAKARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE Y.D. NAGAR,
MANDSAUR, M.P.
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI KAPIL MAHANT, PANEL LAWYER)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This appeal coming on for judgment this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Satyendra
Kumar Singh passed the following:
ORDER
This appeal u/S 454(1) of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated
07.05.2022 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in Cr.C.
No. 05/2022 whereby appellant's application filed u/S 452 of Cr.P.C. for releasing
Cr.A. No. 5016/2022
his weapon - 12 bore gun alongwith license seized in S.T. No. 124/2015 decided
by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur was rejected.
2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 27.04.2015, co-accused
Munshi Ghocha alongwith 7-8 other co-accused persons armed with 12 bore gun
assaulted complainant Liyaquat Lakkad and others and caused injuries to them and
also threatened them. During investigation, it was found that one of the seized 12
bore gun used in the crime was owned by the present appellant and appellant was
also involved in the crime. Therefore, his arms license was seized and after
completion of investigation, chargsheet was filed which was registered as S.T. No.
124/2015. Thereafter, after conclusion of trial, vide judgment dated 19.02.2021,
appellant alongwith co-accused Munshi Ghocha and others were acquitted from
the charges framed against them u/S 147, 148, 307/149 and 294 of IPC and Sec 25
and 27 of Arms Act. Since, co-accused Narendra was absconding, no order was
passed with regard to appellant's seized gun alongwith arms license. Appellant
thereafter filed an application u/S 452 of Cr.P.C. for release of his gun alongwith
arms license which was rejected vide impugned order dated 07.05.2022.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is apparent from the
judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Mandsaur in S.T. No. 124/2015 that charges alleged against the appellant as well
as Munshi Ghocha were not found to be proved. It was also not found proved that
appellant's seized 12 bore gun was used in the alleged crime. Appellant was having
arms license of the aforesaid seized gun, therefore, the same should be released to
him alongwith the license. Hence, impugned order rejecting appellant's application
is not sustainable and deserves to be set aside and appellant's 12 bore gun and arms
license be released to him.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and
Cr.A. No. 5016/2022
submits that proceedings in S.T. No. 124/2015 are still pending with regard to the
co-accused Narendra who is absconding. Therefore, seized articles ought not to be
released to the appellant. Hence, learned trial Court has not committed any error in
rejecting the application filed by the appellant u/S 452 of Cr.P.C. for release of his
12 bore gun and arms license.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
6. It is apparent from the perusal of the record that as per prosecution case
itself, appellant's gun was seized from the possession of co-accused Munshi
Ghocha. Appellant as well as co-accused Munshi Ghocha have been acquitted
from the offences punishable u/S 147, 148, 307/149 and 294 of IPC and Sec 25
and 27 of Arms Act vide judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Court of
Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in S.T. No. 124/2015. It has specifically been
stated in the aforesaid judgment that allegations with regard to use of seized
weapon was not found proved against the appellant as well as co-accused. It is not
the prosecution case that co-accused Narendra or other absconding accused had
used the appellant's 12 bore gun at the time of incident. Therefore, learned trial
Court has committed error in rejecting appellant's application filed u/S 452 of
Cr.P.C. Admittedly, the said 12 bore gun is owned by the appellant and he was
having arms license for the same. Hence, appellant is entitled for release of his 12
bore gun alongwith arms license so seized in S.T. No. 124/2015.
7. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal u/S 454(1) of Cr.P.C. is hereby
allowed and the order dated 07.05.2022 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions
Judge in S.T. No. 124/2015 is hereby set aside. The seized articles be released to
the appellant subject to the condition enumerated below:
(i) Appellant is directed to apply for renewal of the Arms License within a
period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order
Cr.A. No. 5016/2022
passed today.
(ii) Thereafter on production of renewed arms license, 12 bore gun be released
to the appellant in accordance with law.
8. All the pending IAs also stands disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be also sent to the concerned authorities for its
speedy compliance and necessary action.
(Satyendra Kumar Singh)
sh/- Judge
SEHAR HASEEN
2022.11.16
12:20:37
+05'30'
