Anil Dev Singh, J.

1. This is a revision directed against the order of Additional Sessions Judge dated 30th September, 1997. The case against the petitioner is that on 23rd August, 1985 at about 2.10 a.m. he along with six other persons was planning to commit docoity. The accused was apprehended and one countrymade pistol along with one cartridge is alleged to have been recovered from him. The Metropolitan Magistrate convicted the accused under Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo two years, rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 500.The matter was carried in appeal, but the conviction was maintained. However, the sentence was reduced to one years rigorous imprisonment.

2. I have gone through the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. I find that the matter has been dealt with in a slipshod manner. The argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was noticed but no consideration was given to it. It was pointed out by the Counsel that vital evidence connecting the accused with the offence was missing in the case inasmuch as PW 7 had stated that he had taken two sealed parcels to CFSL while in the report of CFSL it was said that one parcel was deposited. In this regard it was also pointed out that Moharrar Malkhana with whom the case property was deposited, was not examined by the prosecution. Besides it was further pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Investigation Officer, RW 3 had not stated that he had deposited the specimen impression of the seal with the Moharrar Malkhana along with the case property. The learned Additional Sessions Judge did not take into consideration the aforesaid vital flaws in the prosecution case which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. In view of these defects which go to the root of the case it cannot be said that the offence against the accused has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner is set aside.

3. The revision is disposed of.