Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vinod Kumar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2022

Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

                                                                     1
                                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                                BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                                                           ON THE 4th OF AUGUST, 2022

                                                     WRIT PETITION No. 19762 of 2016

                                          Between:-
                                          VINOD KUMAR PATEL S/O KAMAL PATEL,
                                          AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NOWGAON CHHAWNI
                                          TEH.  NOWGAON     DISTT.  CHHATARPUR
                                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                 .....PETITIONER
                                          (BY SHRI R. K. SHRIVASTAVA-ADVOCATE)

                                          AND

                                  1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH SECRETARY
                                          HOME DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN,
                                          BHPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                  2.      COMMISSIONER          SAGAR SAGAR       (MADHYA
                                          PRADESH)

                                  3.      DISTRICT   MAGISTRATE     (COLLECTOR)
                                          CHHATARPUR DISTT. CHHATARPUR (MADHYA
                                          PRADESH)

                                  4.      SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RAIL) POLICE
                                          H E A D Q U A R T E R S DISTT. CHHATARPUR
                                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                                          (BY SHRI ANSHUMAN SWAMI-PANEL LAWYER)

                                        Th is petition coming on for admission and I.R. this day, t h e court
                                  passed the following:
                                                                      ORDER

Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.

Signature Not Verified

SAN By way of instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.08.04 17:43:57 IST of India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 07.04.2014 passed by the 2 respondent No.3 as also the order dated 07.07.2015 passed by the respondent No.2 whereby the 12 Bore one Barrel Gun License bearing No.MPCHP/1/Nogaon/4/L/2002 has been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner along with other convicts have been convicted vide order dated 28.09.2012.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed an application for restoration of the Gun License in the light that he has been acquitted of the criminal charges in Cr.A.No.461/2012 vide judgment dated 06.10.2016. Thereafter, in the light of the above acquittal, the petitioner preferred an application on 21.11.2016 before the Collector for restoration of the Gun License. Since, then the application is still pending and no decision whatsoever has been taken by the Collector concerned. Therefore, direction may be issued to decide the same in accordance with law and take a decision.

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents/State has no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner but submitted that looking to the fact that the application was filed in the year 2016, the petitioner may be directed to file a fresh application before the respondent No.3, which shall be considered in accordance with law, taking in view the fact that the petitioner has been acquitted of all the criminal charges.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh application along with supporting documents before the respondent No.3 for renewal/restoration of the Gun License within 15 days. If such an application is filed, the respondent No.3 is directed to consider the Signature Not Verified SAN same in accordance with law by passing a detailed, speaking and reasoned Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months Date: 2022.08.04 17:43:57 IST 3 from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction. Certified copy as per rules.

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE vinay* Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.08.04 17:43:57 IST