Allahabad High Court
Surender Rai vs Commissioner Azamgarh And Another on 19 April, 2023
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24447 of 2002 Petitioner :- Surender Rai Respondent :- Commissioner Azamgarh And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Rai,Aseem Kumar Rai,R.N.Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Aseem Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. By means of present writ petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 12.01.2001 passed by the District Magistrate, Ballia whereby he has canceled the arms license of petitioner and also order dated 12.06.2001, passed by the Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh where the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected under Section 18 of Arms Act, 1959.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner had applied for arms license and was granted the same on 29.06.1985, while he was posed as Sub Inspector of Police at Police Station - Badagoan, District - Varanasi. According to the impugned order dated 12.01.2001, passed by the District Magistrate, it is recorded that the petitioner is a person involved in various criminal acts and involved in particular incident which took place on 29.06.1992, where he has used his rifel alongwith several other persons and attacked with intention to kill an individual and again petitioner was found to be involved in an incident dated 07.05.2000 regarding indiscriminate firing which resulted in breach of public peace and threat to law and order situation. It is stated that with regard to above criminal acts cases were registered against petitioner being Case Crime No. 235 of 1983, under Sections 147, 148, 201, 218, 302 I.P.C., Police Station - Badagaon, Varanasi; Case Crime No. 350 of 1992, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 506 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Amendment Act at Police Station - Kotwali, Ballia; Case Crime No. 185 of 1994, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 427, 307 I.P.C., at Police Station - Narahi, Ballia; and Case Crime No. 137A of 2000, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324, 507 IPC at Police Station - Narahi, Ballia. In the light of aforesaid facts the District Magistrate has concluded that petitioner is involved in several criminal acts and he has misused his licencee weapon and also has criminal history and therefore, in exercise of of power under Section 17 of the Arms Act, cancelled the arms license of petitioner no. 2070 as granted to the petitioner.
4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order of cancellation filed an appeal before the Commissioner who after examining the entire facts and material and also considering the fact that criminal cases are pending against petitioner in the Courts of competent jurisdiction, declined to interfere in the order of cancellation passed by the District Magistrate. The petitioner has assailed both these orders in the present writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in both the matters where there were allegations of misuse of fire arm by petitioner criminal cases have resulted in acquittal of petitioner by means of order dated 29.10.2005 and 01.12.2005. Once petitioner is acquitted in the criminal cases, order of cancellation of arms license deserves to be set aside and license of petitioner restored.
6. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition by submitting that while taking into account various criminal cases against the petitioner and in exercise of power under the Arms Act, District Magistrate came to a conclusion that retention of arms license of petitioner would lead to misuse of fire arm and there is threat to public peace and security and hence, there is no infirmity in the cancellation of arms license of petitioner. He has further submitted that there are numerous criminal cases registered against petitioner and merely on the basis of the fact that he has been acquitted sine all the witnesses have turned hostile will not benefit the petitioner and such an acquittal cannot be read in favour of the petitioner so as to interfere with the discretionary powers exercised by the District Magistrate in cancelling his arms license.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. It is noticed that there are several criminal cases registered against the petitioner and specifically there are allegations with regard to misuse of fire arm where same has been used for indiscriminate firing which cause breach of public peace and safety. The criminal prosecution of petitioner has resulted in his acquittal only on account of the fact that all the witnesses turned hostile.
9. In any view of the matter it cannot be said that the District Magistrate had exercised his discretion in illegal or arbitrary manner or has taken into account any fact which irrelevant and undoubtedly several criminal cases were pending against petitioner including an act where fire arm was used for indiscriminate firing. This Court is of the considered view that the District Magistrate came to the conclusion on the basis of relevant material placed on record. He was well within his competence to come to a logical conclusion where the licensee has used his fire arm which resulted in breach of public peace and safety in accordance with Section 17 of the Arms Act and accordingly, it cannot be said that order cancelling the arms license is illegal or arbitrary, requiring interference of this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
10. In the light of above, this Court declines to interfere with the order of District Magistrate, accordingly, the prayer sought in this writ petition is rejected. The writ petition is dismissed.
11. However, it is noticed that Arms Rules, 2016 have been framed which have come into effect from July, 2016. It is provided that in case petitioner makes an application in terms of Arms Rules, 2016 before the competent authority, same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 19.4.2023 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)