Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 15 (ALL)

Rukhsar Khan v. State of U. P

2018-01-03

ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI

body2018
JUDGMENT : Attau Rahman Masoodi, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The arms licence granted to the petitioner on 9.12.1997 was renewed up to 31.12.2014. Initially, the licence was granted to the petitioner in the State of Karnataka but after his retirement, the petitioner is stated to have settled in district Hardoi, U.P. The arms licence after receiving no objection from the concerned office in the State of Karnataka at the initial stage was renewed from time to time and the last renewal granted by the competent authority at district Hardoi was valid up to 31.12.2014. The petitioner before expiry of licence in the year 2014 had applied for further renewal of the licence on 29.12.2014 and requisite fee was also deposited by him on 30.12.2014. 3. The application for renewal has remained pending for the reason that a copy of the previously renewed licence was not filed along with the application. 4. In terms of section 15 of the Arms Act, 1959, every application for renewal of licence is to be dealt with in a manner in which grant of licence is regulated under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act. Since for the purposes of renewal, original copy of the previously renewed licence is necessary, as such, for fulfilling such a formality, the authorities appear to have asked the petitioner for complying with the formality. 5. The petitioner failed to furnish a copy of the previously renewed licence for the reason that the same had been lost by him on 30.12.2014 while he had gone for police verification at police station Manjhila, district Hardoi. An F.I.R. was lodged by him about loss of the licence on 1.1.2015. 6. It is in these background that the application of the petitioner for renewal of arms licence has remained pending for last more than three years. 7. In the meantime, it appears that the petitioner has also made an effort for procuring a duplicate copy of the licence granted to him but the efforts so made have also materialized. 8. Insofar as furnishing a duplicate copy of the licence granted or renewed is concerned, the same does appear to be regulated under any provision of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder prior to promulgation of the Arms Rules, 2016. 9. 8. Insofar as furnishing a duplicate copy of the licence granted or renewed is concerned, the same does appear to be regulated under any provision of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder prior to promulgation of the Arms Rules, 2016. 9. Rule 28 of Arms Rules, 2016 does provide for a copy and duplicate of a licence granted or renewed. 10. Rule 28 of the Arms Rules, 2016 reads as under:- "Fee payable for copies and duplicates. Where a licence granted or renewed under these rules is lost or accidentally destroyed, the authority empowered to grant such licence may grant a duplicate licence on payment of the fee with which the original licence was chargeable." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid rules would indicate that where a licence granted or renewed is lost or accidentally destroyed on being applied before the licencing authority be granted in its duplicate form on payment of the requisite fee. 12. The application for renewal of the licence filed under section 15 of the Arms Act is pending since the month of December, 2014 simply for the reason that a copy of the previously renewed licence has been submitted by the petitioner. 13. Once the licence was lost and F.I.R. thereof has been lodged by the petitioner, there is no reason as to why the licencing authority at this stage may proceed to consider the petitioner's application for providing a duplicate copy of the same as per the provision of Rule 28 of the Arms Rules, 2016 extracted herein-above. 14. It may be relevant to indicate that the original licence has already been renewed in district Hardoi by the competent authority on fulfilling necessary formalities and thus any correspondence as has been made by the licencing authority vide letter dated 19.8.2015 is irrelevant and uncalled for. 15. Opposite party no. 2 is bound to consider the petitioner's application for providing a duplicate copy of the previously renewed licence on the payment of necessary charges in terms of Rule 28 of the Arms Rules, 2016. In case of any deficiency, it is also open to the competent authority to call upon the petitioner to fulfil any such formality as may be necessary according to rules. 16. In the totality of the circumstances, opposite party no. In case of any deficiency, it is also open to the competent authority to call upon the petitioner to fulfil any such formality as may be necessary according to rules. 16. In the totality of the circumstances, opposite party no. 2 is hereby directed to consider the petitioner's application for supply of a duplicate copy of the previously renewed licence granted under the Arms Act and this exercise shall be completed by the District Magistrate, Hardoi not later than a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order along with the application is filed. 17. On furnishing a copy of the duplicate licence, the petitioner shall furnish a copy of the same before the licencing authority so that the arms licence granted to him is renewed in accordance with law. The pending application for grant renewed licence shall accordingly be dealt with and necessary action shall be taken in the light of reports received in this regard. This exercise shall be completed within one month from the date duplicate copy of the arms licence furnished to the petitioner is submitted before the licencing authority. 18. The petition is according disposed of.