Arms Act 1959 | Firing A Pistol In Self-Defence Doesn't Violate License Condition: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has observed that firing a pistol in self-defence does not violate license conditions. With this, the Court ordered the release of a pistol in favour of the applicant, who had been charge-sheeted under Sections 286, 323, 504, and 506 of IPC and Section 30 of the Arms Act 1959. The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed this order on an application moved...
The Allahabad High Court has observed that firing a pistol in self-defence does not violate license conditions. With this, the Court ordered the release of a pistol in favour of the applicant, who had been charge-sheeted under Sections 286, 323, 504, and 506 of IPC and Section 30 of the Arms Act 1959.
The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed this order on an application moved under Section 482 CrPC challenging an order of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow wherein the applicant's application for release of pistol, 4 live cartridges and pistol license had been rejected.
Essentially, a case was lodged against the applicant (Sunil Dutt Tripathi) on the allegations that he, along with others, was involved in firing with the intent to cause harm to the complainant and others.
Though no injuries were reported from the alleged firing incident, the applicant was charge-sheeted under the aforementioned sections and he moved an application seeking the release of his licensed pistol and four cartridges, however, the application was rejected by the ACJM.
Subsequently, the applicant approached the High Court wherein his counsel argued that in the said incident, no injuries to anyone had been proved by the prosecution. It was strongly contended that the firing was done in self-defence.
At the outset, the Court took into account the statement of the sister of the co-accused wherein she stated that 8-10 people were beating Sachin Sharma, whom the applicant tried to save, however, due to this, the crowd became furious and started attacking both the people and therefore, finding no way to escape, the applicant fired his licensed pistol upwards into the sky and after this, both the people went away from there to save their lives.
Against this backdrop, the Court noted that Section 30 of the Arms Act, which declares violation of the conditions of Arms License to be an offence, doesn't include the act of firing in self-defence.
“Keeping in view the above facts, whereas the applicant and the co-accused have suffered several injuries in the incident and they have not caused any injury to any person; According to the statement of the witness attached with the counter affidavit, the air firing was done in self-defence after being beaten; No proceedings for cancellation of arms license have been initiated; Firing a pistol in self-defense is not a violation of the license condition and does not appear to be an offence under Section 30 of the Arms Act,” the Court remarked.
Consequently, the Court opined that the order passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs) was not maintainable in law and hence, the same was set aside and the court ordered the release of the pistol along with the license and 4 cartridges.
Appearances
Counsel for Applicant: Ishan Baghel, Sagar Singh, Umang Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party: Government advocate Rakesh Kumar Singh
Case title - Sunil Dutt Tripathi vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow And Another
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 7