Karnataka High Court
Karabasappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 April, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449
WP No. 203039 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 203039 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
KARABASAPPA
S/O ANNEPPA DHAMANSUR
AGE 45 YEARS,
OCC BUSINESS
R/O HUDAGI VILLAGE
TQ HUMNABAD
DIST BIDAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHAMBULING SHIVAYOGI., ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
SWETA DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
KULKARNI
Location: HIGH
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
COURT OF BANGALORE-560001
KARNATAKA
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER /
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
BIDAR DIST BIDAR-585401.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
BIDAR DIST BIDAR-585401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 01.02.2023 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN FILE
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449
WP No. 203039 of 2025
HC-KAR
NO.RBB/ARM/CR-48/2021-22/12830 AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND THE
ORDER DATED 20.03.2024 IN FILE NO. H.D. 260 KAA 2023 PASSED
BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER ANNEXURE-K, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. Petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following reliefs:
a) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 1.2.2023 of respondent no.2 in file No.RBB/Arm/CR-48/2021-22/12830 as per Annexure-G and impugned order dated 20.03.2024 in file No.HD.260 KAA 2023 passed by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-K, in the interest of justice and equity.
b) Issue writ of mandamus directing the
respondents to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 07.04.2025 and issue arms license to the petitioner within time frame, in the ends of justice and equity.
c) Issue any writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. -3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449 WP No. 203039 of 2025 HC-KAR
3. It appears that petitioner was granted license for a pistol under the Arms Act by the jurisdictional District Magistrate in the year 2014. For the reason that petitioner had misused the said weapon and had fired from the said weapon on his brother for which a case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.5/2016 by the jurisdictional Police, the District Magistrate by order dated 10.08.2016 vide Annexure-B had cancelled the license granted to the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner was tried in S.C.No.12/2017 for the offences punishable under Section 307 of IPC and Sections 27 & 30 of the Arms Act, and was acquitted by the jurisdictional court of District Judge, and thereafter it appears that the petitioner had filed an application on 16.09.2021 to renew his arm license. The District Magistrate vide order at Annexure-G dated 01.02.2023 has rejected the said application and confirmed his earlier order dated 10.08.2016 canceling the petitioner's arm license. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner had filed a statutory appeal before the State Government which was rejected vide order at Annexure-K dated 20.03.2024. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court.
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449 WP No. 203039 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, submits that petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case registered against him for having misused the pistol and his name is also now deleted from the rowdy-sheet maintained by Humnabad Police Station as per order dated 26.05.2023 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Bidar vide Annexure-J. Petitioner is, therefore, entitled for renewal of his arm license which was issued to him for protection of crop. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the petition on the ground that petitioner who claims to be an agriculturist does not require a pistol for the purpose of protecting his crop. The license issued to the petitioner for his pistol was misused and he had fired on his brother from the said weapon. Petitioner is involved in multiple criminal cases and he was a rowdy-sheeter, and therefore, it is not safe to grant arm license in his favour. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. Petitioner, who claims to be an agriculturist, has stated in his writ petition that he needs the license for his pistol to protect his sandalwood crop which he has grown in his land. It -5- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449 WP No. 203039 of 2025 HC-KAR appears that after the license was issued to the petitioner under the Arms Act, he had misused the weapon and had fired at his brother using the same. It also appears that petitioner and his brother have some serious disputes with regard to their ancestral property.
7. The material on record would also go to show that petitioner was involved even in other criminal cases, and therefore, his name was included in the list of rowdy-sheeters maintained by Humnabad Police Station, Bidar District.
8. Merely for the reason that petitioner is now acquitted in the criminal case that was registered against him for making an attempt to commit the murder of his brother and for having misused the license issued to him under the Arms Act, and merely for the reason that petitioner's name is now deleted from the list of rowdy-sheeters maintained by Humnabad Police Station, it cannot be said that the petitioner may not misuse the weapon once again. The jurisdictional Police as well as the Superintendent of Police, Bidar District, have submitted a report to the District Magistrate stating that it is not safe to renew the license issued under the Arms Act for the pistol of -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3449 WP No. 203039 of 2025 HC-KAR the petitioner. In my considered opinion, the past history of the petitioner and the present report of the jurisdictional police, disentitles him of holding any arms license.
9. The Appellate Authority, having appreciated the aforesaid aspects of the matter, has rightly confirmed the order passed by the District Magistrate canceling the license issued to the petitioner under the Arms Act.
10. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the said order which is impugned in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK