New Delhi, Feb 2 (IANS): The Supreme Court Wednesday held that Section 27(3) of the Arms Act, 1959 that provides for "mandatory death penalty" in case of death being caused by use of prohibited arms is ultra vires (beyond the powers) of the constitution and declared it void.

The provision of death sentence was inserted in Section 27 of the Arms Act by amending it in 1988 in the wake of terrorist and anti-national activities in Punjab.

The apex court bench of Justice A.K. Ganguly and Justice J.S. Khehar in their judgment said that "this is thus a very drastic provision" as it provides for "mandatory death penalty."

The sub-section (3) of the Section 27 of the act which deals with the punishment for using arms, says "whoever uses any prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition or does any act in contravention of section 7 and such use or act results in the death of any other person, shall be punishable with death penalty".

The Section 7 of the act prohibits acquisition or possession, or manufacture or sale of prohibited arms or prohibited ammunitions.

The provision of death sentence was inserted in the Section 27 of act in 1988. Prior to the amendment, the maximum sentence under this section was seven years or fine or both.

Referring to the constitution's 44th amendment, the judgment said: "That is why it has been provided by the 44th amendment act of 1978 of the constitution, that Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) cannot be suspended even during the proclamation of emergency under Article 359."

The court said this while rejecting an appeal by the Punjab government challenging July 27, 2005 judgment by the Punjab and Haryana High Court giving the benefit of doubt and acquitting constable Dildar Singh working with Border Security Force for killing a senior colleague.

Dildar Singh was accused of shooting his senior Harish Chander from his rifle April 11, 1993 when their company was based at Fatehabad in Amritsar district of Punjab. Chander died on way to hospital.

Dildar Singh was tried by the sessions court for committing murder and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The trial court convicted him and awarded rigorous imprisonment for life along with other sentences under the Arms Act which were to run concurrently.

The conviction and sentencing by the trial court was reversed by the high court, which was challenged by the state government seeking harsh penalty.