In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India quashed proceedings against Irfan Khan, who was charged under the Arms Act for possession of a buttondar knife. The Court noted that the knife’s dimensions, as recorded in the First Information Report (FIR), did not meet the statutory criteria for an offence under the Arms Act or the Delhi Administration (DAD) Notification. The bench emphasized that prosecuting the appellant on insufficient grounds constituted an abuse of the legal process. The case was heard by the bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Case Background
The case arose from an incident on July 9, 2022, when Irfan Khan, 22, was apprehended in Pravasi Park, Delhi. According to the FIR, he was acting suspiciously and was found carrying a buttondar knife with the following dimensions: a blade length of 14.5 cm, handle length of 17 cm, and width of 3 cm. A charge sheet was filed against him under Sections 25, 54, and 59 of the Arms Act, 1959.
Khan approached the Delhi High Court, seeking to quash the FIR, but his petition was dismissed in April 2023. He subsequently moved the Supreme Court, challenging the validity of the proceedings.
Legal Issues
1. Compliance with Arms Act and Rules: The Arms Rules, 2016, specify that a knife becomes an offense under the Arms Act if its blade exceeds 22.86 cm (9 inches) in length and 5.08 cm (2 inches) in width, unless intended for domestic or lawful purposes. The dimensions of Khan’s knife fell short of this threshold.
2. Application of DAD Notification (1980): The Delhi Administration’s notification includes specific categories of knives that require licensing if they exceed a blade length of 7.62 cm and width of 1.72 cm, but only when used for “manufacture, sale, or test.” The Court found no allegations that Khan’s possession fell into these restricted categories.
3. Procedural Flaws in Prosecution: The Court scrutinized the charge sheet, noting that it lacked any evidence to substantiate claims that the knife was intended for sale or testing as mandated by the DAD Notification. The investigation did not align with the statutory requirements for prosecution under the Arms Act.
Observations by the Court
Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, delivering the judgment, remarked:
– On Lack of Evidence: “The totality of the evidence collected by the investigation officer is not sufficient to draw even a remote inference that by simply being found in possession of the buttondar knife, the appellant acted in violation of the DAD Notification.”
– On High Court’s Ruling: The bench criticized the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of the quashing petition, stating that it “did not advert to these fundamental flaws in the prosecution case and rejected the petition cursorily.”
– On Prosecution’s Role: “The prosecution cannot be allowed to improve its case as set out in the charge sheet.”
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order and quashed FIR No. 477 of 2022, along with the resulting charge sheet. The bench clarified that the mere possession of the knife did not constitute an offense under the Arms Act or the DAD Notification.
Case Details
– Case Title: Irfan Khan vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
– Bench: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta
– Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. Srishti Agnihotri
– Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. K.M. Natraj (Additional Solicitor General)
