The appellant was convicted in the Magistrate’s Court on two accounts of contravening the Firearms Act and one count of contravening the National Parks and Wildlife Act, Cap. 316. The appellant appeared before the Supreme Court to apply for the return of his firearm which was ordered to be forfeited. The State Counsel contended that in view of the fact that the appellant was convicted under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, the state was in a position to request the court to make an order for forfeiture of the firearm. Under the Firearms Act, a magistrate has a discretion as to whether or not a firearm should be forfeited but under the National Parks and Wildlife Act an order for forfeiture can only be made on the request of the Public Prosecutor and the Magistrate has no discretion but to order accordingly. An order for forfeiture cannot be made on the request of the Public Prosecutor and the Magistrate has no discretion but to order accordingly. An order for forfeiture cannot be made in the case of an appeal to a higher court. Since the appellant was acquitted in respect of the counts under the Firearms Act, the order for forfeiture under that Act cannot stand. Consequently, the appeal was allowed; the order for forfeiture was set aside and the firearm would be returned to the appellant.