A bench of Justices SS Shinde and Milind N Jadhav found that the petitioner was clearly unaware of the existence of a live cartridge in her luggage.
“It is clear that the petitioner herself came to know about the presence of the live cartridge in her bag only when it was detected during screening and prior to that the petitioner had no knowledge about its presence,” the Court said.
The Court underscored that the term possession used in the Act refers to conscious possession and not possession which is not to the knowledge of the person.
“The Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Dutt Vs. State through C.B.I., Bombay (II) 1 has clearly held that the possession of the fire arm under the said Act must be conscious possession with the knowledge of and requisite mental element and mere custody without awareness of the nature of such possession cannot fall within the ambit of sections 3 and 25 of the said Act,” it noted.
The woman, along with her family was travelling to Kochi from Mumbai in December 2016 when a live cartridge was detected in her hang baggage during the security check at Mumbai Airport.
A first information report (FIR) was registered against the her under Sections 3 and 25 of the Act. She was subsequently arrested and later released on bail.
She then moved the High Court to quash the proceedings.
Advocate NU Khan, appearing for the petitioner informed the court that she lived in the vicinity of a police training center and firing range in Sangli and that her minor daughter could have picked it up the cartridge and placed it in her baggage.
The Court found this contention plausible and held that the possession was not in fact, conscious possession. It, therefore, quashed the proceedings registered against her at Sahar Police Station.
Source: Barandbench
