Patna High Court Acquits Ex-RJD MLA Anant Kumar Singh Booked In Arms Act Case For Alleged Possession Of Rifles, Magazines

The Patna High Court on Wednesday (August 14) acquitted the former RJD MLA Anant Kumar Singh in a high-profile Arms Act case after finding that the prosecution was not able to establish the guilt of Singh beyond reasonable doubt.

Initially, Singh was booked for the offences under the Arms Act, 1959 after the Patna Police recovered an AK-47 assault rifle, and other unlicensed items from his ancestral house and an INSAS rifle and a magazine from his residence on Mall Road in Patna.

Singh was convicted by the trial court for the offences under Section 25(1-A), 26(2)/35 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a term of ten (10) years with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- for the offence under Section 25(1-A)/35 of the Arms Act.

Reversing the decision of the trial court, the bench comprising Justice Chandra Shekhar Jha noted that the prosecution case is a case of not only faulty investigation, rather “it is a case where different material questions, regarding sealing of seized articles at spot itself, non-examination of independent witnesses/seizure list witnesses, as claimed, the disputed version regarding arrest and presence of appellant in premises, the manner in which the seized magazines were tested and produced before the court and above all where seized six magazines and bullet proof jacket were kept for long three days after seizure i.e. from 24.06.2015 to 27.6.2015, are such material questions, which prosecution was duty bound to answer during the trial, but failed.”

The Court noted that the entire case of the prosecution was based on the chance recovery and no evidence was produced by the prosecution to prove that Singh knew about the presence of the alleged items found in his both residences.

The court found entire recovery and seizure exercise doubtful because on one hand it was claimed by the prosecution that the entire seizure exercise was conducted in the presence of the independent witness but on the other hand during the trial, the prosecution witnesses including the informant were not sure whether said magazines of Insas Rifle were sealed at the place of occurrence/recovery itself.

The court also faulted the prosecution for not being able to explain for long three days where these articles were kept and with whom.

“None transferring of seized materials to I.O. of this case despite his presence at the police station when informant/PW-3 came over there alongwith seized articles is a serious lacuna in prosecution case. Nonexamination of independent witnesses who were accompanied with informant/PW-3 and raiding party also cast a serious doubt over entire seizure and sealing of seized articles at the place of recovery itself.”, the court said.

“It also appears from deposition of prosecution witnesses that they are not even sure whether appellant/convict was present at the time of raid, search, seizure and sealing. In such background, conviction, as secured in the present case on the basis of witnesses, who are from police department are not appearing wholly reliable, and as such, did not inspired confidence in favour of conviction.”, the court added.

The court rejected the prosecution's contention that the appellant/Singh be liable under Section 35 of the Act as it imposes liability upon the person from whose premise articles were recovered.

To prove that the person was aware of the existence of articles in his premise, the prosecution is bound to establish facts from which the court could have reason to believe that he was aware of the existence of the unlicensed firearm, as held in Pabitar Singh Vs. State of Bihar [1972 AIR SC 1899].

“it appears that none of the prosecution witnesses deposed during trial as to suggest that appellant was aware about the existence of magazines of Insas Rifle within the premises of his Govt. allotted residence. Appellant was in jail during raid. Prosecution is bound to establish facts from which court could have “reason to believe” that appellant was aware about the existence of unlicensed recovered firearms magazines. This Court is satisfied that in present case any such facts have been established by prosecution.”, the Court observed.

Based on the aforesaid observations, the Court acquitted the Appellant/Singh from all the charges framed under the Arms Act and directed his immediate release from jail.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr.Shivam, Advocate

For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ajay Mishra, Special P.P.

Case Title: Anant Kumar Singh @ Anant Singh Versus The State of Bihar, CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3270 of 2022

Click here to read/download the judgment