Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 434 (ALL)

FAHEEM AKHTAR v. STATE OF U P

2008-02-25

RAJIV SHARMA

body2008
RAJIV SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 3. 2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage. 3. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 23. 8. 2007 passed by the respondent no. 2 as contained in annexure 1 to the writ petition and further prays for a direction to the respondent no. 3 to reconsider the application for grant of arms license of Rifle in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law. 4. It has been stated that the petitioner had applied arms licence of rifle before the respondent no. 2 and as the same has not been disposed of by the respondent no. 2, the petitioner has preferred a writ petition, which was numbered as writ petition no. 3266 (MS) of 2007, before this Court and this Court, vide order dated 10. 7. 2007, directed the District Magistrate, Barabanki to decide the representation of the petitioner for grant of licence in respect of 315 Bore Rifle by a speaking and a reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. In compliance thereof, vider oder dated 23. 8. 2007, the respondent no. 2 considered the application of the petitioner and rejected the same on the ground that the petitioner is in possession of one arms license. Being aggrieved thereof, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no bar under Section 3 (2) of the Arms Act that any person cannot acquire more than one fire arms. 6. Being aggrieved thereof, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no bar under Section 3 (2) of the Arms Act that any person cannot acquire more than one fire arms. 6. Section 3 (2) of the Arms Act provides that "notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no person, other than a person referred to in sub-section (3), shall acquire, have in his possession or carry, at any time, more than three fire arms: Provided that a person who has in his possession more firearms than three at the commencement of the Arms (Amendment) Act, 1983, may retain with him any three of such firearms and shall deposit, within ninety days from such commencement, the remaining firearms with the officer in charge of the nearest police station or, subject to the conditions prescribed for the purposes of sub-section (1) of section 21, with a licensed dealer or, where such person is a member of the armed forces of the Union, in a unit armoury referred to in that sub-section. " 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer only to the extent that he may be permitted to make a fresh application to the authority concerned and the authority concerned be directed to consider and decide the same, expeditiously, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection. 8. In view of the above, without entering into the merit of the case, it is provided that in case the petitioner prefers a fresh representation within a period of fifteen days from today, the respondent no. 2 is directed to consider and decide the same, expeditiously, say, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation along with the certified copy of this order in accordance with law. 9. With these observations, the writ petition is finally disposed of. .