1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. ORDER Thakur Raghuveer Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan SB CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1040/2006. Under Section 454 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. DATE OF ORDER: 10th September, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. PATHAK Mr. Devendra Raghav for the appellant. Mr. B.K. Sharma PP for the State. BY THE COURT: By this appeal, appellant Thakur Raghuveer Singh has prayed that the impugned order dated 19th July, 206 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No.82/2006 to the extent of confiscation of arms be quashed and set aside and the fire arms may kindly be ordered to be handed over to the appellant. The brief relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that the appellant along with other co-accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjunu in Sessions Case No.82/2006 for committing the offence under section 302 IPC and other offences under the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sesisons Judge vide judgment and order dated 19th July, 2006 acquitted all the accused from the charges levelled against them under section 302 IPC and other offences under the Indian Penal Code. At the 2 time of passing of the order of acquittal, it was also ordered that the fire arms recovered and seized by the police during the course of investigation be confiscated and deposited in the police line through Superintendent of Police, Jhunjhunu after expiry of the period of preferring appeal. Since the appellant is a licence holder of one 12 bore gun double barrel GA No.5423 and one riffle 32x40 bore GA no.258 which were seized by the police during the course of investigation and since acquittal has been recorded, therefore, the same be handed over to him as no reason has been assigned why the fire arms were confiscated. It is contended by the learned counsel that since the accused is a licence holder of the fire arms seized during the course of investigation by the police which were in possession of the appellant, therefore, before passing order to confiscate the fire arms an opportunity was required to be given to the applicant which was not given. It is also contended that no reason has been assigned while passing order for confiscating the fire arms, therefore, the appeal requires to be allowed and that part of the order in relation to confiscate the arms recovered from the possession of the applicant as ordered by the learned trial court requires to be set aside. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has not disputed the fact that no reasons have been assigned in the order while passing the order to confiscate the fire arms seized by the police during the course of investigation. 3 After having considered the submissions made before me and on perusal of the impugned judgment, I find that no reasons have been assigned by the learned trial court as to for what reason it was essential to confiscate the fire arms and thereafter to deposit the same in the police line. In the above circumstances, the proper order requires to be passed by the learned trial court and this appeal requires to be allowed while setting aside the order of the trial court to the extent it relates to confiscate the fire arms seized during the course of investigation by the police with a direction to the learned trial court to decide the matter regarding entitlement of fire arms seized during the course of investigation in the matter on moving such application by the appellant within a period of one month from today. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the order dated 19.7.2006 passed by the learned trial court is set aside to the extent of confiscation of fire arms seized by the police during the course of investigation in this case with a direction that on moving an application within a period of one month from today in this regard, the learned trial court shall consider the matter in relation to claim of fire arms and decide the same in accordance with law. (S.P. PATHAK,J)