Skip to content


Queen-empress Vs. Jayarami Reddi - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1898)ILR21Mad360
AppellantQueen-empress
RespondentJayarami Reddi
Cases ReferredThe Queen v. Siddappa I.L.R. Mad.
Excerpt:
arms act - act xi of 1878, section 4--possession of unserviceable fire-arm without a licence. - .....judgment:3. the ruling of the full bench renders it necessary to set aside the acquittal. we accordingly do this, and we restore the conviction and sentence passed by the joint.....
Judgment:

1. We think there is no doubt that the revolver in the case is a fire-arm within the meaning of the Act. The question is not so much whether the particular weapon is serviceable as a fire-arm, but whether it has lost its specific character and has so ceased to be a fire-arm. In referring to the serviceable character of the arm we think the decision in The Queen v. Siddappa I.L.R. Mad. 60 was not correct and that the proper test was lost sight of. Whether in any particular case the instrument is a fire-arm or not, is a question of fact to be determined according to circumstances. We answer the question in the affirmative.

2. This case again coming on for final disposal after the expression of the opinion of the Full Bench, the Court (Collins, C.J., and Benson, J.) delivered the following judgment:

3. The ruling of the Full Bench renders it necessary to set aside the acquittal. We accordingly do this, and we restore the conviction and sentence passed by the Joint Magistrate.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //