Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2167 (ALL)

SOHAN RAM v. STATE OF U. P.

2008-10-21

TARUN AGARWALA

body2008
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—Heard Sri Ram Niwas Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. In spite of a stop order, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. 3. The petitioner holds an arms licence under the Arms Act, 1959 and the petitioner was served with an order dated 18.12.2004 and another order dated 12.9.2007, by which, the arms licence of the petitioner was suspended and the petitioner was directed to show cause why his licence should not be revoked. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, has now filed the present writ petition. 4. A perusal of the impugned order dated 19.8.2007 indicates that the arms licence has been suspended on account of the petitioner being involved in two criminal cases and, on that basis, the petitioner has been held to be a person of a criminal nature and that the prescribed authority concluded and gave its subjective satisfaction that it would not be in public interest for the petitioner to hold a licence. The suspension order of 2004 was issued on account of the fact that the petitioner was involved in one criminal case No. 227 of 2003 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. The provision relating to suspension of the arms licence is provided under Section 17 (3) of the Arms Act which reads as under : “17. Variation, suspension and revocation of licences.— (1) .................... (2) ................... 5. The provision relating to suspension of the arms licence is provided under Section 17 (3) of the Arms Act which reads as under : “17. Variation, suspension and revocation of licences.— (1) .................... (2) ................... (3) The licensing authority may by order in writing suspend a licence for such period as it thinks fit or revoke a licence— (a) if the licensing 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; or (b) if the licensing authority deems it necessary for the security of the public peace or for public safety to suspend or revoke the licence; or (c) if the licence was obtained by the suppression of material information or on the basis of wrong information provided by the holder of the licence or any other person on his behalf at the time of applying for it; or (d) if any of the conditions of the licence has been contravened; or (e) if the holder of the licence has failed to comply with a notice under sub-section (1) requiring him to deliver-up the licence.” 6. The essential ingredients for the suspension of the arms licence is, that there must be material available before the licencing authority to give its subjective satisfaction that the possession of the arms by the licensee was going to endanger public peace or public safety and it is only thereafter that the licencing authority, after recording reasons, could order the suspension of the licence pending enquiry for the revocation of the arms licence. 7. In the present case, there is no finding that the possession of the arms licence with the petitioner would endanger public peace or public safety. The impugned order only states that the petitioner appeared to be a person of a criminal nature since two criminal cases are pending, and therefore, it would not be in public interest to allow the petitioner to hold the licence. 8. In my opinion, the reasons recorded by the licencing authority in the impugned order is not the appropriate ingredient for the issuance of the suspension order. 8. In my opinion, the reasons recorded by the licencing authority in the impugned order is not the appropriate ingredient for the issuance of the suspension order. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 12.9.2007 and 18.12.2004 cannot be sustained and are quashed in so far as it relates to the suspension of the arms licence. The writ petition stand allowed. It would be open to the licencing authority to conclude the proceeding under Section 17 of the Arms Act for the revocation of the arms licence, if any. —————