This revision was rejected on 19 12 1968 and thereafter another revision was filed in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
75 of 1969.
Before the High Court, it appears the only companytention urged was that the charge went beyond the sanction in hat while the sanction specifically mentions that the appellant had been found in possession of the revolver at the Police Station, Neemuch on 17 9 1966, the charge speaks of his having been found in such possession on or before 17 9 1966 which words are vague and number according to the sanction, as such the charge was bad.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 23rd April, 1969 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench in Criminal Revision No.
N. Shroff, for the respondent.
The Magistrate after perusal of the, case diary and other papers and after hearing the applicant, by his Order dated 23 9 1968 was of the view that there was a prima facie case for flaming a charge against the appellant under Section 25 a of the Act and he accordingly framed the charge in respect of which a revision was filed before the Additional Sessions Judge, Neemuch.
Frank Anthony, A T. M. Sampath and K.C. Agarwala for the appellant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cr.
241 of 1969.
After the sanction, the Police prosecuted the appellant on 16 1 1968 as stated already in the 1st Class Magistrates Court, Neemuch.
A. No.
The sanction states that the appellant had allegedly been found in possession of and having under his companytrol one revolver without a valid licence at Neemuch Police Station, Neemuch on 17 9 1966.
On that information, the revolver was seized from the said Chhanganlal on the next day namely on 17 9 1966.
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by Jaganwohan Reddy, J. This appeal is by Special Leave challenging the judgement of the High Court which dismissed a Revision petition filed by the appellant against the framing of a charge by the, Magistrate of the 1st Class, Neemuch.
The sanction was granted by the District Magistrate, Neemuch on 4 11 1967.
