IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-1043 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 21, 2009 Lal Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. Jasbir Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S. Teji, AAG, Punjab, Mr. Nandan Jindal, Advocate, for respondent No.2. S.D. Anand, J. The petitioner is being prosecuted in case FIR No. 6, dated 29.01.2008 for an offence under Section 336 IPC and certain provisions of the Arms Act. Insofar as the latter part of the prosecution is concerned, the learned State counsel states that he is not in a position to controvert the averment (made on behalf of the petitioner) that the petitioner was indeed found to be a valid licencee for the possession of the fire arm under reference. Crl. Misc. No. M-1043 of 2009 In the light thereof, there is no justification for allowing the prosecution of the petitioner under the Arms Act to continue. That part of the prosecution shall stand quashed. However, there is no reason to quash the prosecution for the offence under Section 336 IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to persuade this Court to grant an order in favour of the petitioner qua the prosecution for violation of the provisions of Section 336 of the Indian Penal Code. The petition shall stand dismissed qua that part of the relief. Disposed of accordingly. October 21, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2 Crl. Misc. No. M-1043 of 2009 3