Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1764 (RAJ)

Bheema Ram v. State of Rajasthan

2018-08-21

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2018
JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - Through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Bheema Ram has approached this court for assailing the order dated 09.05.2013 (Annex.10) passed by the District Magistrate, Sirohi turning down the prayer of the petitioner for grant of licence for additional firearm licence and so also the order Annex.11 dated 15.02.2016 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur in appeal affirming the order passed by the District Magistrate. 2. Facts in nutshell are that the petitioner, who has a gas agency and is also involved in the business of granite mines and possess a valid licence for a muzzle loading gun. Feeling constrained by the size and unwieldy nature of the weapon owned by him, the petitioner filed an application to the District Magistrate, Sirohi for granting an additional firearm licence, viz. pistol/revolver. The District Superintendent of Police submitted a favourable report dated 26.04.2013 to the District Magistrate conveying that the petitioner had to travel through the remote terrain for his business/vocation. He had to carry large sum of currency received from sale of gas cylinders as well as granite. The muzzle loading gun, for which the petitioner holds a licence is an unwieldy weapon, which is difficult to carry and thus, recommendation was made to issue an additional firearm licence sought for by the petitioner for a smaller weapon. However, the District Magistrate, Sirohi passed a totally non-speaking and laconic order Annex.10 dated 09.05.2013, the language whereof is reproduced hereinbelow :- As stated above, the said order has also been affirmed. 3. Mr. Bharat Singh, learned counsel representing the petitioner, vehemently urged that the impugned orders suffer from total non-application of mind to the admitted facts available on record. The order passed by the District Magistrate, Sirohi is totally nonspeaking and laconic. The prayer made by the petitioner for seeking permission to buy a smaller weapon found favour with the District Superintendent of Police, who recommended grant of additional firearm licence in favour of the petitioner. However, the District Magistrate acted in totally arbitrary manner and turned down the petitioner's application without assigning any reasons whatsoever. He further submitted that even the Divisional Commissioner, while deciding the appeal fell into the same error. However, the District Magistrate acted in totally arbitrary manner and turned down the petitioner's application without assigning any reasons whatsoever. He further submitted that even the Divisional Commissioner, while deciding the appeal fell into the same error. He, thus, implored the court to accept the writ petition and direct the District Magistrate, Sirohi to issue a licence in favour of the petitioner for a smaller firearm, i.e. a pistol or revolver. 4. Mr. O.P. Boob, learned Government Counsel though vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by Mr. Bharat Singh, but he too was not in position to dispute the fact that the order passed by the District Magistrate, Sirohi rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of licence to possess a smaller firearm was turned down without assigning any reason whatsoever. It is further not in dispute that the Superintendent of Police strongly recommended in favour of granting the required licence to the petitioner. Manifestly, the plea of the petitioner that muzzle loading gun, which he already holds, is a very cumbersome weapon is understandable and plausible. Looking to the nature of business in which the petitioner is involved, his prayer for grant of licence of smaller weapon was absolutely justified and ought to have been allowed by the District Magistrate, Sirohi. The impugned orders do not stand to reason as the same were passed with total non-application of mind to the facts of the case by ignoring the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Sirohi. 5. As a consequence, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned orders Annex.10 dated 09.05.2013 passed by the District Magistrate, Sirohi and Annex.11 dated 15.02.2016 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur are quashed and struck down. The competent authority, i.e. the District Magistrate, Sirohi, shall forthwith and not later than within a period of two months from submission of a copy of this order issue the requisite licence in favour of the petitioner, who may purchase a smaller firearm of his choice as per the licence.