Blog

This particular decision is upheld by the Andhra Pradesh High Court through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY in the case of Maroju Vaikunta Balabji v. State of A.P. (CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.2550 OF 2022)

Facts:

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner is 33 years who went to the cinema theatre on the date of release of a film along with one air gun and gave stills as a hero along with the gun. The said poses given by him were captured by the TV people and the same was telecasted. A case under Sections 290, 506 (2) r/w 34 Penal Code, 1860 i.e., IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, was registered against the petitioners. Thus, A1 was arrested and later disclosed that his brother-in-law A2 purchased the said air gun for the purpose of playing by his children through online. The criminal petitions are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

Arguments and Judgement:

The Court observed that the offences punishable under Sections 290, 506(2) IPC are bailable in nature. As regards the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, is concerned, the pistol which was seized from the possession of A-1 is an air gun. It is a toy gun. Therefore, prima facie Section 25 of the Arms Act is not attracted to the facts of the case.

The Court thus held “in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are entitled to bail.”

Judgement reviewed by – Arvind Roshan

Click here to view the judgement