Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1341 (JHR)

Santosh Kumar Singh v. State Of Jharkhand

2017-08-02

AMITAV K.GUPTA

body2017
JUDGMENT Amitav K. Gupta, J. – Heard the counsels. 2. The petitioner has submitted that he was carrying on his business at Dimapur, Nagaland and on his application all India Licence No.6514.NL/DMR for N.P. Bore Pistol was issued by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Arms Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland. That subsequent to winding up of his business in Nagaland, he has been residing and carrying his business at Giridih. That he is residing in a rented premises, as would be evident from Annexure 2. That Annexure 6 series are the invoices of the Commercial Tax Department and papers regarding his business at Giridih. That after shifting to Giridih, he had applied for reregistration of his arms licence before the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih on 04.06.2013 in accordance to the provision of Rule 62(3) of the Arms Rules, 1962. The said application was verified by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Arms Magistrate, Dhanbad. As per verification report this permanent address is mentioned and shown at H.N.503, Sita Niwas, Shri Ram Vatika, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad (Annexure 4). That vide memo No.150/LAW/Giridih dated 19.02.2014 the petitioner was informed that since his place of residence is within the district of Dhanbad he should get the registration of his arms licence done at Dhanbad. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih has failed to appreciate that the petitioner has shifted his residence to Giridih for a period exceeding 30 days in terms of the provision of Rule 62(3) of the Arms Act, 1962. The registration of arms licence is required for his personal safety and that of his family members. Learned counsel has stated that the genunity of the said arms was verified by respondent No.2 which is admitted in para 16 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent/State. That refusal of reregistration of the licence by the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih is against Rule 62(3) of the Arms Rules, 1962 and prays that the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih be directed to re-register the licence as per the rules. 3. Mr. Jai Prakash, learned A.A.G. has submitted that the Central Government is empowered to issue an all India arms licence in terms of Schedule II of Arms Rules, 1962. 3. Mr. Jai Prakash, learned A.A.G. has submitted that the Central Government is empowered to issue an all India arms licence in terms of Schedule II of Arms Rules, 1962. That the petitioner had applied for the arms licence in 2013 before the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih and it would be evident from Annexure 2, of the writ application, wherein he has stated that he has been residing in the rented premises at the given address at Giridih. That a letter was sent at the said address but it was returned with endorsement that no person of such name resides at the said address. The address of the petitioner was verified by the Circle Officer, Dhanbad who submitted the report that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Dhanbad. It is argued by the learned counsel that there is no plausible explanation as to why the petitioner did not apply for reregistration of the arms at Dhanbad which is situated barely 60 k.m. from Giridih. That the petitioner is a holder of all India licence and there is no irreparable loss or injury likely to be caused to the petitioner if he gets his licence re-registered at Dhanbad. It is submitted that Rule 62(3) does not mandate the authority to renew the licence because the authority has to consider various factors and the rule is for enabling the authority to keep a track regarding the place and location where the arms are kept. 4. Heard. In this context it would be relevant to refer Rule 62(3) and (4) of the Arms Rules, 1962 which reads as follows: "(3) If a person who holds a license in Form III changes his place of residence, permanently or temporarily for more than thirty consecutive days, and carries with him the weapon covered by the license, to a place other than indicated in column 2 of the license, he shall (within thirty days of such change), send intimation about such change to the licensing authority of the place of his new residence as well as to the authority which granted the license or last renewed it, as the case may be, and shall on demand forthwith produce the license and the weapon to the first mentioned authority for making necessary entry in the license to indicate therein the particulars of the new residence of the licensee. (4) The licensee shall intimate within a period of thirty days in regard to change of residence to the licensing authority of the new place of his residence and produce his license before the licensing authority of the new place for appropriate endorsement. On such change of residence and after such endorsement on the license, the said license shall be deemed to have been transferred to the jurisdiction of the licensing authority and renewing authority of the new place of residence and such authority shall be the licensing authority and the renewing authority in relation to the said license for purposes of provisions of the Arms act, 1959 and the Arms Rules, 1962." 5. The rules prescribe that if a person changes his place of residence for more than 30 consecutive days and carries with him the weapon covered by the licence, to a place other than indicated in column 2 of the licence, he shall, within thirty days of such change, send an intimation about such change to the licensing authority regarding the place of his new residence. No document regarding such information or intimation having been communicated to the licensing authority of Dimpaur regarding change of place of his residence has been produced by the petitioner. Thus, at this stage, in the absence of the document as required under Rule 62(3), no direction can be issued to the concerned authority for re-registering the arms licence of the petitioner. However, the petitioner is at liberty to apply before the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih by producing the requisite documents as also the intimation sent by him to the licensing authority and the proof of his new residence. The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih is at liberty to conduct any verification in the matter and pass a reasoned and speaking order in terms of the rules and in accordance with law. 6. With the said direction, this writ petition stands disposed off.