Ved Prakash Mishra vs State Through: P.S. IGI Airport

Sunil Gaur, J

Quashing of FIR No. 211/2018, under Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station IGI Airport, Delhi is sought in this case, while

relying upon Supreme Court’s decision in ‘Anand Kumar Mohatta and Anr. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi Department of Home and

Anr’ 2018(14) SCALE 756.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner himself was unaware of the presence of 4 live cartridges in his hand bag at the time of his travel.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that it was an act of sheer negligence on his part and he ought to have checked the handbag before leaving for

the airport. It is pointed out that petitioner was travelling to Lucknow from Delhi on an official work for Competition Commission of India (herein after

referred to as the Commission) being the Director (Law) of the Commission in a matter which was suddenly reflected in the cause-list of the

Hon’ble High Court. So, it is submitted that there was no intention on his part to commit offence under Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act,

1959.

Perusal of status report reveals that petitioner had valid arms license for the weapon in question. The pertinent observations of

Supreme Court in ‘Anand Kumar Mohatta (Supra) are as under:-

“There is nothing in the words of this Section which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or

miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C even when the discharge application is pending with the trial court. Indeed, it would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a

person can be interfered with at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced, and the allegations have materialized into a charge sheet. On the contrary

it could be said that the abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a charge sheet after investigation. The

power is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any courtâ€​.

Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR of this case, status report and the decision cited, I find that petitioner was not in conscious possession of 4 live

cartridges found in his baggage at IGI Airport, Delhi. Applying the dictum of Supreme Court’s decision in ‘Anand Kumar Mohatta (Supra) to

the facts of this case, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of Rs. 50,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within

a week from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the Investigating

Officer, FIR No. 211/2018, under Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station IGI Airport, Delhi and the proceedings emanating

therefrom shall stand quashed.

This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.

Dasti.