High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Amol Singh v. State Of U.P. & Another - WRIT - C No. 3912 of 2000  RD-AH 7384 (13 December 2005)
Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the orders dated 16.12.1998 and 4.1.2000 passed by the respondent Nos. 2 and 1.
The petitioner submits that he is having DBBL Gun No.2879. The petitioner has not misused the gun at any point of time. Two cases against the petitioner under sections 323 and 404 and another case under sections 147, 148, 323 and 504 was registered but the petitioner has been acquitted. In spite of the aforesaid fact the gun license of the petitioner has been cancelled by the District Magistrate, Mainpuri. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in spite of the fact a finding has been recorded by the District Magistrate, Mainpuri that the petitioner has been acquitted in all the cases but in spite of the recording of the aforesaid finding the license of the petitioner has been cancelled.
The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner under Section 18 of the Army Act. The appellate authority has also without assigning any reason that what are the circumstances, not to permit the petitioner to have the license. The authorities below has not recorded any finding that the petitioner has misused the gun license at any point of time, therefore, the order passed by the authorities is liable to be quashed.
As the appeal of the petitioner has already been dismissed the petitioner has approached this Court.
The Learned Standing Counsel was granted time for filing the counter affidavit vide its order dated 25.1.2000 but no counter affidavit has been filed up-till-date.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel and have perused the record.
From the record it is clear that the District Magistrate, Mainpuri, while cancelling the license of the petitioner has recorded a finding to this effect that the petitioner has already been acquitted in the cases which were pending against the petitioner. Only on the basis of the report, that the petitioner appears to be having a mentality of criminal and he can misuse the gun, therefore, in the interest of public it will not be feasible to continue the license in favour of the petitioner. The District Magistrate has not recorded any reason that what are the circumstances which lead the licensing authority to satisfy that the petitioner is not a person to whom the license be permitted to continue. The Court has perused the order passed by the Commissioner also. The Commissioner being an appellate authority was obliged to look into the circumstances and has not recorded a finding and has not given any reason why the petitioner's license is being cancelled. Only reason has been stated that it will not be in the public interest to permit the petitioner for having a gun license.
In my opinion, this is not sufficient reason which can lead the cancellation of the license of a person.
In view of the aforesaid fact, the orders dated 16.12.1998 and 4.1.2000 passed by the respondent Nos. 2 and 1 are hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the District Magistrate, Mainpuri to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observations made above and will pass a detailed and reasoned order according to law preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.
With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.