Kerala High Court
Sreejith K vs The Additional District Magistrate on 25 September, 2024
2024:KER:71264
WP(C) No.30156/2024
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 30156 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
SREEJITH K
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O NARAYANAN K, RESIDING AT KATTERI HOUSE,
MUNDERI, P O EACHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670591
BY ADVS.
M.K.SUMOD
VIDYA M.K.
THUSHARA.K
DELITA TITUS
NAMITHA GEORGE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KANNUR CITY
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001
OTHER PRESENT:
GP SRI. T. JAYAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71264
WP(C) No.30156/2024
-2-
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 25th day of September 2024) The petitioner submitted an application before the 1st respondent to issue a No Objection Certificate under Rule 102 of the Explosive Rules, 2008 (for short, 'the Rules'). The petitioner is the owner of the building bearing No.157/A in Ward No.9 of the Koodalli Grama Panchayat, which was constructed to possess and sell firecrackers. The petitioner wanted to earn his livelihood by starting a firecrackers-selling shop in the building owned by him. For the same, he required a license, as contemplated under the provisions of the Explosives Act, 1884 (for short, 'the Act'). As per Rule 102 of the Rules, NOC from the 1 st respondent is a precondition for securing the license. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for NOC. The Secretary, the Koodali Grama Panchayat, as per Ext.P3, has given NOC to the petitioner. Similarly, the District Fire Officer, Kannur, also issued NOC as per Ext.P4. The District 2024:KER:71264 WP(C) No.30156/2024 -3- Magistrate, by Ext.P5 order, declined to grant NOC on the report of the District Police Chief, Kannur City. The reason was that a crime was registered against the petitioner, as Crime No.1109/2012 by the Chakkarakkal Police Station under Section 9(B)(1)(b) of the Act and 286 of the IPC. The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 in this writ petition.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that since a crime has been registered against the petitioner and the same ended in the registration of calendar case No.1673/2014, the police have not recommended the issuance of a NOC, as he was already faced with the allegation of keeping firecrackers illegally without any license. He submitted that Ext.P5 is in order and needs no interference.
3. Section 6A of the Act deals with the 'prohibition of manufacture, possession, sale or transport of explosives by young persons and certain other persons'. Sub-clause (ii) of Section 6A prescribes that persons who have been sentenced on conviction of 2024:KER:71264 WP(C) No.30156/2024 -4- any offence involving violence or moral turpitude for a term not less than six months at any time during a period of five years after the expiration of the sentence shall not be granted a license.
4. Rule 103 of the Rules deals with the 'procedure to be observed for issue of No Objection Certificate and for grant of license', which prescribes that the applicant desiring to obtain a license from the Chief Controller or Controller shall apply to the District Magistrate or the Director General of Mines Safety with copies of the site plan showing the location of the premises proposed to be licensed for issue of a certificate to the effect that there is no objection to the applicant receiving license for the site proposed.
5. The 1st respondent has rejected the grant of NOC as per Ext.P5 only because a crime was registered against the petitioner as crime No.1109/2012, and the police have also objected to the same. The petitioner has produced Ext.P6, which is the judgment in calendar case No.1673/2014 in which the petitioner has been 2024:KER:71264 WP(C) No.30156/2024 -5- found not guilty for the offences punishable under Section 286 of IPC and Section 9(B)(1)(b) of the Act and was acquitted under Section 255(1) of Cr.P.C. Nowhere in the Section or Rules, prescribes that a person against whom a crime has registered, and subsequently acquitted, cannot be issued with an NOC. In such circumstances, merely relying on the registration of the crime, the 1st respondent cannot deny NOC to the petitioner.
In the result, Ext.P5 stands quashed, and the 1 st respondent is directed to issue NOC to the petitioner if the only objection is regarding the registration of crime No.1109/2012 against the petitioner, which ended in acquittal. The orders shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI JUDGE JS 2024:KER:71264 WP(C) No.30156/2024 -6- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30156/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER UNDER FILE NO.
5116701/194/2024 DATED 06/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE KOODALI GRAMA PANCHAYATH Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION ON 01/09/2022, WITH REF NO. 427018/22/DCKNR AND ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION WITH NO.
401083/RPDC17/GPO/2023/8198/(2) DATED 21/10/2023 HAS GIVEN THEIR NO OBJECTION FOR THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE WITH NO.
DFOKNR/4293/2022-F DATED 15/10/2022 HAD GIVEN THEIR NO OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER STORING AND SELLING FIRECRACKERS Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ISSUED ORDER WITH REF NO. DCKNR/9467/2022-D4 DATED 25/07/2024 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CC NO.
1673/2014 DATED 17/12/2018 OF THE COURT OF THE CJM THALASSERY