- (1.) S. R. Bhargava, J. Heard the learned AG. A, for the State. Prosecution case against opposite party Suchcha Singh was that on 27th October, 1986 a factory made foreign riffle (303 bore) and three live cartridges of 303 bore were recovered from his possession. Only a case under Section 25 of Arms Act was registered against the opposite party. Opposite party applied for bail. By order dated 7th November, 1986 Sessions Judge, Pilibhit granted bail to opposite party. State moved the present application under Section 439 for cancellation of bail and alleged that the opposite party belongs to a gang of anti social, anti national and hazardous criminals. His associates are involved in Crimes No. 214 of 1986, 352 of 1986, 359 of 1986 and 158 of 1986 and in all these cases dangerous foreign made and other arms were recovered from the associates of the opposite party. It was further alleged that the opposite party is a Sikh and has association with Punjab. He frequently visits Punjab. He has deep rooted association with terrorists. Then according to the State opposite party is serious threat to the national integrity. The arms recovered were illegally supplied to the opposite party and his as sociates for large scale violence in India. Opposite party is working as agent on behalf of foreign countries in India.
(2.) NOTICE was issued to opposite party who has filed counter-affidavit and denied allegations made by the State. It is evident that the local administration did not take any action against the opposite party under the Terrorists Act. There was case against the opposite party for offence under Section 25 Arms Act only. In these circumstances and in view of the counter-affidavit. the grounds alleged for cancellation of bail cannot be accepted. Only this much need be said that after amendment in the Arms Act made in 1983 possession of unlicensed arms attracts minimum punishment of three years. It may further be mentioned that possession of factory made foreign riffle should be viewed strictly. But Section 439 cannot be used as a provision for appeal against the discretion exercised by the Sessions Judge. Hence, without going further into the matter I hold that it is not a fit case for cancellation of bail. If the local administration has material to connect the opposite party with Anti Social, Anti National or subversive activities it shall be at liberty to take action under appropriate Act. This application for cancellation of bail is rejected. .;