AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Abhijit Sinha, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that although she is named in the FIR there is no evidence either in the FIR or in the entire case diary of her being in any manner armed with any arm and ammunition and notwithstanding the same the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under the Arms Act against the petitioner vide order dated 8.8.06 passed in Kharagpur P.S. Case No. 72/06.
If there is no evidence against the petitioner regarding being possessed of arm and ammunition the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has not given his reason for having taken cognizance for the offence under the Arms Act against the petitioner.
In that view of the matter the impugned order so far the petitioner is concerned is hereby quashed and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger is directed to pass a fresh order so far the petitioner is concerned after giving reason for his satisfaction in respect of the petitioner for the alleged offence under the provision of the Arms Act. With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of.