Unconscious Possession Of Firearms Would Not Attract Arms Act

THE DELHI HIGH COURT RECENTLY HELD THAT UNCONSCIOUS POSSESSION OF FIREARMS WOULD NOT ATTRACT THE ARMS ACT, WHILE QUASHING AN FIR AGAINST A STUDENT POSSESSING LIVE CARTRIDGES.

FACTS OF THE CASE

• Adhiraj Singh Yadav v. State, W.P.(CRL) 754/2020.

• The Petitioner/Accused was found in possession of 20 live cartridges, while he was travelling to Ahmedabad.

• The Petitioner claimed before the High Court, that he had borrowed the luggage bag from his landlord, and had packed his belongings in hurry.

•  The bag already contained the cartridges which went unnoticed by the Petitioner.

•  The Petitioner also apprised the Court that his landlord possessed a valid license to keep firearms, and that the cartridges were lawfully owned by the landlord.

DELHI HIGH COURT RULING

•  The Court accepted the Petitioner’s contentions and quashed the FIR registered against him.

•  The Court observed that such unconscious possession of firearms would not attract the Arms Act.

•  Reliance was placed on Gunwant Lal v. State, wherein the Supreme Court had held that “the possession of a firearm under the Arms Act must have the element of consciousness or knowledge of the same.”

•  Reliance was also placed on Sanjay Dutt vs State, wherein the Supreme Court had made similar observation regarding the presence of mental element while possessing firearms.

DO YOU THINK THIS DECISION CAN BE MISUSED IN CERTAIN WAYS? DO LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS SECTION BELOW!