Counsel on behalf of the accused charged under section 25(1) of The arms act argues on the false implication on recovery of weapon: Gujarat High Court
TITLE – Pappu Versus State of Gujarat and Others
Decided On-: August 22, 2023
4695 of 2014
INTRODUCTION-
The original accused has asked to have the FIR for the offences punishable under Section 25(1)(1-B)(A) of the Arms Act quashed and set aside by filing the current application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The facts and circumstances that led to the filing of the current application are such that on March 20, 2014, the current FIR was filed against the present applicant and the other co-accused, alleging that Dhrangadra police officers were on patrol at the time. The police were informed at the time that Bharatbhai Malubhai Mevada was in possession of a firearm without a licence and that the current applicant had given him the firearm in question.
COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION
The learned attorney representing the applicant claims that since the co accused was ordered to be released on parole with police protection at the time of the incident, the co accused could not have received any weapons from the co accused as claimed in the FIR. The accusations made against the current Applicant in the FIR are highly improbable. He also made reference to the Criminal Order handed down by Court, which directed that the Applicant be expanded on temporary bail for a period of seven days while being monitored by the police. Additionally, he claimed that the relevant Trial Court had cleared the co-accused from whom the illegal firearm was allegedly recovered. As a result, he offered to approve the current application.
According to the role assigned to the current applicant, he had given the accused, Bharatbhai Malubhai Mevada, the aforementioned firearm. After reading the questioned FIR, it appears that the applicant has only been charged with the current offence based on the testimony of the aforementioned Bharatbhai Malubhai Mevada, from whom the weapon was found. The record also shows that the applicant was expanded on temporary bail with police accompaniment for a period of seven days pursuant to an order dated 23.9.2013; as a result, at the time of the incident, the applicant was free on bail with police accompaniment.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Steffi Desousa