ORDER This writ application has been filed for quashing of an order dated 31.3.1990 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Patna, (Respondent no. 2), by which the licence of the petitioner's rifle has been suspended and the petitioner has been directed to surrender the same alongwith the licence before the Officer In-charge of Naubatpur Police Station. A copy of the impugned order has been annexed as Annexure-1 to this writ application. 2. By the said order a notice was also served on the licencee/petitioner to show cause as to why his licence be not cancelled and the suspension order would remain in force till a final order in the matter of cancellation of arm is taken. 3. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the District Magistrate has no authority to suspend the licence without having an opportunity for showing cause to suspend the same. 4. Section 17 of the Arms Act deals with variation, suspension and revocation of licence. Under Clause 3(a) of Section 17 of the said Act the Licencing Authority may by order in writing suspend a licence for such a period as it thinks fit or revoke the same if the Licencing Authority is satisfied that the holder of the licence is prohibited by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force from acquiring, having in his possession or carrying any arms or ammunition, or is of unsound mind, or is for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act. The Licencing Authority can also suspend or revoke a licence under clause (b) of Sub-Section 3 of Section 17 of the Act, if he deems it necessary for the security of the public peace or for public safety. Where the Licencing Authority makes an order varying a licence under Sub-Section (1) or an order suspending or revoking the same under Sub-Section (3) of Section 17, it shall record in writing the reasons therefore and furnish to the licencee, on demand, a brief statement of the same unless in any case if the Licencing Authority is of the opinion that it would not be in the public interest to furnish such statement. 5. 5. Sub-Section (5) of Section 17 of the Act, makes it obligatory upon the Licencing Authority to record in writing the reasons thereof while passing the order revoking or suspending the same, and on demand, furnish a brief statement thereof, to the holder of the licence unless it considers that it would not be in public interest to do so. 6. It was vehemently argued on behalf of the petitioner that even in temporary suspension the Licencing Authority is to give notice to the holder and he has no power to suspend the licence pending enquiry into its cancellation or suspension. 7. Reliance has been placed upon the Pull Bench decision in the case of Kapildeo Singh v. State of Bihar and others (AIR 1987 Patna 122 : 1987 PLJR 385 ). In the aforesaid Full Bench case the point for consideration was whether the registration and pendency of a criminal case for a major or capital offences justify the suspension or revocation of a licence under Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) of Sec. 17 of the Act and the Full Bench after considering the relevant provisions of law and cases held that registration and pendency of a criminal case may for adequate reasons justify the suspension or revocation of a licence under Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 17 of the Act. That point is not involved in the present writ application. Therefore, the aforesaid Full Bench case will not help the petitioner. 8. The learned counsel has also relied upon a Full Bench case of Allahabad High Court reported in A.I.R. 1986 page 142 (Chhanga Prasad Sahu v. State & ors) and on the decision in the case of M/s Swami Distributors v. State of Bihar ( 1990 (1) B.L.J. 392 ) : 1990 PLJR 210 . 9. Before coming to these cases, we may point out here that the Licencing Authority under Clause (b) of Sub-Section 3 of Section 17 of the Act may suspend or revoke a licence if he deems it necessary for security of public place or for public safety. From a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the Licencing Authority has temporarily suspended the licence of the petitioner till a final order is passed as to whether the arms licence of the petitioner should be revoked or suspended or not. 10. From a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the Licencing Authority has temporarily suspended the licence of the petitioner till a final order is passed as to whether the arms licence of the petitioner should be revoked or suspended or not. 10. The Licencing Authority while considering the question as to whether or not an arms licence should be revoked or suspended has to be satisfied as to whether fact, stated in Clause (a) to (e) of Section 17 (3) of the Act exist or not. 11. From a perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the same has been passed under Section 17 (1) (b) of the Act, which deals with security of the public peace or for public safety. The Licencing Authority may on certain information being supplied before it, for its own satisfaction proceed to hold an enquiry with a view to find out if the conditions for suspending the licence exist or not and till that enquiry is completed, in our opinion, he can temporarily suspend the licence, as provided under Section 17 (3) (b). Discretion under Sub• Section 17 (3) (b) is based on subjective satisfaction of the District Magistrate. 12. In the instant case, we are concerned with the temporary suspension of a licence given to the petitioner under the Arms Act. Even in Chhanga Prasad Sahu's case (supra) it has been held that in an enquiry held by the Licencing Authority with a view to find out if the conditions for revoking/suspending the arms licence exist, it is not necessary for the Licencing Authority to associate the licencee and the licencee in such an enquiry cannot claim it as a matter of right that he must be heard and be given an opportunity to place his version for suspension of licence for a temporary period. 13. So far as the cases of M/s Swami Distributors (supra) is concerned, licence was granted under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984. Clause 11 of the said Unification Order provides for two kinds of suspension, namely, one under Clause 11 (i) i.e. suspension by way of punishment and the other under Clause 11 (2) i.e. suspension during the pendency or contemplation of a proceeding for cancellation of licence. Clause 11 of the said Unification Order provides for two kinds of suspension, namely, one under Clause 11 (i) i.e. suspension by way of punishment and the other under Clause 11 (2) i.e. suspension during the pendency or contemplation of a proceeding for cancellation of licence. Their Lordships held that so far as the question of giving opportunity in the case of interim suspension is concerned, clause 11 (2) of the Unification Order expressly excludes the same. 14. In our opinion, in case it becomes apparent to the Licencing Authority that possession of arms by the licensee is going to endanger the public peace and safety, it can straightway suspend the licence and proceed with the enquiry to find out as to whether the conditions as laid down exist for the same or not. As, we have already indicated above, the impugned order has been passed under Section 17 (3) (b) of the Act, we do not find any legal infirmity in the same so that it can be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution. 15. We are accordingly of the opinion that the aforementioned decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not at all helpful in determining the true nature and scope of the provision contained in Section 17 (3) (b) of the Act and, accordingly, the application is dismissed.