The defendant in his family house, in C. Street no. x, in Podgorica, contrary to Article 5, paragraph 1 of the Law on Weapons, unlawfully held category A weapons referred to in Article 4, paragraph 2, item 7, namely: explosive weapon – hand grenade M75 and hand grenade M52P3, possession of which is prohibited to citizens, and because he, contrary to Article 5, paragraph 2, unlawfully held category B weapons referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 12 of the Law on Weapons, namely a Gasser revolver, model 1870, caliber 11.2 mm, as well as ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 1 of the Law on Weapons – two .38 SPECIAL caliber rounds; ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 11 of the Law on Weapons – three rounds marked SBP – 1 6-16 and ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 4 of the Law on Weapons – two caliber 7.62 mm x 39 mm rounds marked IK – 1981, for which he did not have a weapon certificate issued by the competent authority. The Basic Court in Podgorica found him guilty because he committed the criminal offence of unlawful possession of weapons and explosive substances referred to in Article 403, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro.
The court imposed a security measure of confiscation of items – explosive weapons, revolver and ammunition, as items used in the commission of a criminal offence.
The criminal offence of unlawful possession of weapons and explosive substances, Article 403, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code.
Article 403
Unauthorized manufacture, possession, mediation and trade in weapons or explosive materials
(2) Whoever, without authorization, possesses, carries, manufactures, repairs, processes, sells, procures, exchanges, transports or otherwise releases into circulation firearms, ammunition, explosive substances, fragmentation or gas weapons whose possession is prohibited to the citizens shall be punished by a prison sentence for a term from six months to five years.
The court sentenced him to a prison sentence for a term of 7 (seven) months, which includes the time spent in custody as of 29 November 2018. The court assessed the defendant’s defense in which he stated that the Gasser revolver dated from the 19th century, that it was a gun with which his great-grandfather had fought in war and that it could not be fired from, and in this regard the defense counsel’s statement that during the proceedings it was not proven that the defendant committed the criminal offence he was accused of, because the defendant treated the item in question as an inherited trophy. Statements were also made that two 7.62 mm rounds were for a gun he had with a permit, which was taken for expert examination and was never returned to him, that three pieces of ammunition were the property of his late father, as well as that he did not know where the two pieces of ammunition of unknown origin came from. However, the court found that these statements did not lead to a different judgment given that it was determined during the proceedings that the weapons and ammunition in question were functional, whereas the defendant, in the view of the court, knew that he had to have documentation (issued by the competent authority) in order to hold them lawfully, which is logical, given that the defendant had previously been convicted of the same criminal offence, and that at the time of the crime he possessed a weapon for which he had a permit, as confirmed by the defendant in his defense, so he was certainly familiar with the conditions for holding weapons and ammunition. Furthermore, in the view of the court, the allegations of the defendant that the bombs were planted on him were completely inadmissible, since the house was searched in the presence of the defendant and a witness, as confirmed by the testimony of witness E. T., and especially by the fact that the defendant himself stated in his defense that he had attended the search of the house, signing the minutes without objection and without any remarks about the possible burglary of the house and the planting of bombs. Deciding on the criminal sanction for the defendant, the court, within the meaning of Article 42, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, considered all the circumstances that affect the sentence (mitigating and aggravating circumstances), finding as mitigating circumstances on the part of the defendant his personal and family circumstances, i.e., the fact that he was a father of three children, unemployed and of poor financial status, along with his mature age. On the other hand, an aggravating circumstance was found in his previous convictions, as determined from the excerpt from the criminal records in the name of the defendant from 10 January 2019, of which once for the same criminal offence. Thus, pursuant to Article 36 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, the court sentenced the defendant to a prison sentence for a term of 7 (seven) months, which includes, pursuant to Article 51 of the Criminal Code, the time spent in custody from 29 November 2018, from 2:30 pm, finding that the sentence was adequate to the degree of guilt of the defendant and the gravity of the crime, and that it would achieve the purpose of punishment referred to in Article 32 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, sufficiently for the defendant not to commit criminal offences in the future, within the general purpose of imposing criminal sanctions referred to in Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code. The verdict is final.
On 29 November 2018, in his family house, in C. Street no. x, in Podgorica, contrary to Article 5, paragraph 1 of the Law on Weapons, unlawfully held category A weapons referred to in Article 4, paragraph 2, item 7, namely: explosive weapon – hand grenade M75 and hand grenade M52P3, possession of which is prohibited to citizens, and because he, contrary to Article 5, paragraph 2, unlawfully held category B weapons referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 12 of the Law on Weapons, namely a Gasser revolver, model 1870, caliber 11.2 mm, as well as ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 1 of the Law on Weapons – two .38 SPECIAL caliber rounds; ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 11 of the Law on Weapons – three rounds marked SBP – 1 6-16 and ammunition referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3, item 4 of the Law on Weapons – two caliber 7.62 mm x 39 mm rounds marked IK – 1981, for which he did not have a weapon certificate issued by the competent authority. He committed the criminal offence of unlawful possession of weapons and explosive substances referred to in Article 403, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro.
High Court in Podgorica
This verdict is obtained from the official web site of the Basic Court in Podgorica.
In this case, although the case involved two hand grenades and a large quantity of ammunition, the prosecutor qualified it as a less severe form of the criminal offence referred to in Article 403, paragraph 2, instead of qualifying it as a more severe form of the criminal offence referred to in paragraph 3 of Article 403, because a large quantity of weapons was involved.