Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118557 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 434 of 1985 Appellant :- Vanasur Respondent :- State Counsel for Appellant :- Rajiv Chaturvedi,V.K. Agnihotri Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard Sri Devendra Mani Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri V.K. Agnihotri, learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 07.01.1985 passed by learned Special Judge Anti Dacoity, Etawah in Session Trial No. 337 of 1983 (State Vs. Vanasur) arising out of Crime No. 40 of 1980 under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station Chaubia, District Etawah. Facts in brief are that on 17.06.1980 A.S.I. B.P. Mishra alongwith other policemen were on patrolling duty at 11:30 PM when they caught accused-appellant while he was trying to escape seeing the said police officers. On being caught when searched, a female watch looted in dacoity was recovered, regarding which case having Crime No. 380/80 was already committed to trial in the same court as aforesaid, and one 12 Bore country-made pistol and 2 live cartridges were also recovered from the accused having no license. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that in this case he is innocent and have falsely been implicated by showing false recovery of tamancha from the possession of the present appellant. The learned trial court also convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 25 of Arms Act for a period of three years rigorous imprisonment by order dated 07.01.1985. There was no any public or independent witness at the time of alleged recovery and the prosecution witnesses are police personnel. Only on the basis of testimony of those two police personnel conviction had been held by the learned trial court. He also submits that they remained in jail during the period of trial and also during appeal and were released on bail on 20.02.1985 and now 45 years have elapsed and he has become old, therefore, request to release him on the period already undergone in jail. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid but could not dispute the fact that 45 years have elapsed from the date of incident and appellant has also become old and he remained on bail during the period of appeal. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the judgment and order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the incident took place on 17.06.1980 at about 11:30 P.M. in the night. A.S.I. B.P. Mishra with other police personnel arrested the appellant with a tamancha 12 Bore and two live cartridges. Recovery Fard was prepared by him and case was registered as Crime No. 40 of 1980 under Section 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Chaubiya, District Etawah. After investigation charge sheet was filed on which cognizance was taken and after compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. charge was framed against the appellant which he denied and claimed for trial. The prosecution examined A.S.I. B.P. Mishra as P.W. 1 and S.I. Chandra Pal as P.W. 2. accompanying him at time of arrest except these witnesses no any other witness had been examined by the prosecution. The Investigating Officer, Chick writer had also not been examined. Even prosecution sanction has also not been proved by the prosecution. Where the prosecution has not examined the Chick writer, Investigating Officer and also not proved the prosecution sanction no conviction can be recorded against the appellant only on the basis of evidence of arresting Officer. In this way, the conviction as recorded by the learned trial court cannot be upheld by this Court as a result, the conviction and sentence as held by the learned trial court against the appellant by judgment and order dated 07.01.1985 is hereby set aside and appellant is acquitted. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed. Copy of this judgment along-with original trial court record be transmitted to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. A compliance report be sent to this Court within two months. Office is directed to keep the compliance report on record. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad