Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Murari Singh v. Commissioner, Varanasi And Another - WRIT - C No. 3122 of 2000 [2005] RD-AH 7168 (8 December 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

The present writ petition has been filed against the order-dated 20.10.1999 passed by the Commissioner on an appeal filed by the petitioner under section 18 of the Arms Act.

The license of the petitioner was cancelled on the ground of involvement in a criminal case.  The appellate authority while deciding the appeal has converted the cancellation into suspension and has directed that in case the petitioner is acquitted in the criminal case within a period of one month, he will make an application before the District Magistrate, Chandauli for renewal of the license and within a period of three months, the District Magistrate, Chandauli will pass a detailed and reasoned order.  Now it has been informed that the petitioner has been convicted. It has also been informed by the counsel for the petitioner that the appeal against the order of conviction has been filed and that is still pending.  The petitioner submits that the DBBL gun is not a case property or no allegation for using the said DBBL gun has been made against the petitioner, therefore, in such circumstances, the DBBL gun which is being kept in malkhana be handed over to the petitioner.

After consideration of the submission made on behalf of the petitioner as the appellate authority himself has given an option that immediately after acquittal the petitioner can move an application to the District Magistrate, Chandauli and the order of cancellation has been converted into suspension.  Now the petitioner submits that being DBBL gun not of the case property, the petitioner is entitled to get the same.  This Court at this stage cannot pass any order for releasing the DBBL gun in favour of the petitioner as the criminal appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending and the appellate authority has already given an option.

It has also been submitted by the petitioner that the petitioner was to sell the DBBL gun but unless and until permission is granted, the same cannot be sold out. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that for the purposes of safe custody and to preserve the arms it will be in the interest of justice that a direction to this effect be issued to keep both the arms in the custody of registered dealer.

I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.  The petitioner can move an application to the District Magistrate,  Chandauli with a request which has been made by the petitioner before this Court. If the petitioner submits an application for sale of DBBL gun the District Magistrate will consider the same.  

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.