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


Girish Bhan Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 11913 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 12637 (1 August 2006)


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).


                                                                               Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11913  of 2004

Girish Bhan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Despite time having been granted on several occasions and more than two years having passed, no counter affidavit has been filed. In such circumstances, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.

The petitioner was granted a fire arms licence. By an order dated 27.11.2000 passed by the respondent no.2, District Magistrate, Kannauj the arms licence of the petitioner had been cancelled. Challenging the said order the petitioner filed an appeal before the respondent no.3, Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur Nagar which has been dismissed vide order dated 8.1.2003. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the sole basis on which the fire arm license of the petitioner was cancelled is because of a crime case no.459 of 2000 under sections 302, 307 I.P.C. having been lodged against him. Admittedly vide judgment and order dated 28.2.2002 passed by the Sessions Court (Annexure no.2 to the writ petition) the petitioner has been acquitted in the aforesaid criminal case. Even though the aforesaid fact had been brought to the notice of the appellate authority, yet the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that had the police had taken the statement of the injured witness, and also if the eight witnesses (which included the sister-in-law and mother of the petitioner) had not turned hostile, the decision of the case would have been different and the petitioner would not have been acquitted. Such remarks were not warranted as the Commissioner was not considering the appeal against the judgment of the Sessions Court. In the present set of facts, since the petitioner has been acquitted in the sole criminal case which was filed against him, on the basis of which the licence had been cancelled, in my view, he would be entitled to the restoration of his arms licence. The appellate order dated 8.1.2003 cannot thus be sustained in the eyes of law.

For the foregoing reasons this writ petition stands allowed. The orders dated 27.11.2000 and 8.1.2003 passed by respondent no.2, District Magistrate, Kannauj and respondent no.3, Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur Nagar are quashed.

No order as to cost.      




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.