IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2009 / 15TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 815 of 2009() ------------------------ CC.714/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, WADAKKANCHERY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------- SHENSON,S/O.MATHEW,PUTHOOR VEEDU, PULLANIKKADU, WADAKKANCHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 815 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed to quash Annexure B charge sheet and all proceedings in C.C.714/08 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wadakkanchery. The petitioner herein was a driver of an auto rickshaw from wherein the police found a sword, stick etc. and thereafter filed a charge sheet against all including the driver u/s 27(1) of the Arms Act. Accused 1 and 2 stood trial in C.C.578/03 and was found not guilty and acquitted. The Court found that, “The prosecution has not produce any document to show that MOs.1 and 2 are of prescribed class or description. Unless and until the said crucial aspect is established the prosecution u/s 27(1) of the Act is liable to fail. Even if the prosecution case is to the effect that MOs.1 and 2 were recovered from the possession of the accused is regarded as true, the accused cannot be found guilty u/s 27(1) of the Act.” Crl.M.C. 815 OF 2009 -:2:- 2. So it is a positive finding against the prosecution for lack of particulars which cannot be improved by making a trial against these persons. Further that person was only the driver of the auto rickshaw and the other three accused were travelling in the auto rickshaw with the alleged weapons. In order to attract an offence u/s 27(1) of the Arms Act it is a condition precedent that there must be use of arms. Absolutely there is no case for the prosecution regarding the use of arms by the present petitioner being the driver of the auto rickshaw. So as discussed by the Court below in its judgment and subsequently on the question of non-use of the arm it has to be held that no fruitful purpose will be served by proceeding against the accused in this case. Therefore I invoke S.482 and quash all further proceedings in C.C.714/08 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wadakkanchery. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-