1 258911 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY vgm CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2589 OF 2011 Nihal Pravinchand Tanna ...Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr. Kuldeep Patil for the Petitioner Mr. A.S. Gadkari, A.P.P., for the State CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2011 P.C.:- This petition was heard on 15th November, 2011. The petition is for quashing F.I.R. No. 246 of 2011 dated 21st June, 2011 registered with Vakola Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 170 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. As regards offence under Sections 170 and 419 of I.P.C., we have already expressed our opinion that it is not a case for quashing 2 258911 of F.I.R., which opinion was noted after hearing the counsel for the petitioner. 2. The only issue that we thought could be answered in favour of the petitioner, subject to the learned A.P.P. being given opportunity to verify the correct position, was relating to offence punishable under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. Considering the fact that the petitioner was possessing valid licence for weapon and ammunition recovered from him, the question of application of offence under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act does not arise. The learned A.P.P. has verified that position, and, in all fairness, submits that the said offence cannot proceed against the petitioner. In the circumstances, the learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner will not be proceeded for offence under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. That statement is accepted. After completion of the investigation, in the police report to be filed under Section 173 of the Code before the concerned Court, it would be limited I.P.C. offence, including for Sections 170 and 419 of I.P.C. We make it clear that rejection of the relief of quashing of the F.I.R. in toto is not an expression of opinion either way on the merits of the controversy. In other words, if charge-sheet is filed against the 3 258911 petitioner, all questions will have to be considered on their own merits in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 3. This petition is disposed of. R.G. KETKAR, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.