This revision was rejected on 19 12 1968 and thereafter another revision was filed in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
After the sanction, the Police prosecuted the appellant on 16 1 1968 as stated already in the 1st Class Magistrates Court, Neemuch.
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 framing 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.
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.
The sanction was granted by the District Magistrate, Neemuch on 4 11 1967.
Before the High Court, it appears the only companytention urged was that the charge went beyond the sanction in that 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.
On that information, the revolver was seized from the said Chhanganlal on the next day namely on 17 9 1966.
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. This appeal is by Special Leave challenging the judgment 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.
