Sarkaria, J. - (1.) Appellant before us was tried by the Sessions Judge, Palghat on a charge under section 302, Indian Penal Code, for shooting dead with his 12-bore licensed gun, one Bhaskaran alias Vasu on April 1, 1971. On the same day after the occurrence, the appellant surrendered at Police Station Koyalmannam, along with his licensed gun which he had used in shooting the deceased.
(2.) At the trial, accused Madhavan set up a plea of self-defence. In the light of the evidence brought on record, the Sessions Judge accepted this plea and held that the accused was entitled to the protection of Section 96, Penal Code, and had therefore committed no offence. At the same time, without assigning any reason, he directed that "M. O. 1 gun shall be confiscated to the Government".
(3.) Against this direction of confiscation of the gun, Madhavan filed Criminal Revision No. 392 of 1972 in the High Court. The Revision was dismissed by a learned single Judge with these observations: "Although the direction is not accompanied by sufficient grounds for doing so, I do not think it proper to interfere with the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge ..... in an order under Section 517, Cr. P. C. the principle is that it should be returned to the person from whose custody it was seized. That of course is the general rule. I am aware that there is no other claimant for the gun in this case and the gun naturally belongs to the petitioner. But the order of confiscation is made by way of sufficient safeguard against its use again by the petitioner. I do not think it necessary to interfere with the order of the Court below.";