Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.54 seconds)The Arms Act, 1959
Masiuddin Naimuddin vs Commissioner, Allahabad Division, ... on 7 March, 1972
In Masiuddin Vs. Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad and another, 1972 ALJ 573, it is held that "after a license is granted, the right to hold the license and possess a gun is a valuable individual right in a free country". Further it is held that "a license may be cancelled, inter alia on the ground that it is necessary for the security of the public peace or for public safety, to do so. Mere existence of enmity between the licensee and another person would not establish the necessary connection with the security of public peace or public safety".
Habib vs State Of U.P on 1 May, 2013
In Habib Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2002 (44) ACC 783, it has been held that "mere involvement in a criminal case cannot in any way affect the public security or public interest and the order cancelling or revoking licence of fire arm was not justified".
Satish Kumar Singh vs District Magistrate, District Kushi ... on 13 February, 2020
In Satish Singh Vs. District Magistrate, Sultanpur 2009 (4) ADJ (LB), it has been held that "right to possess arms is statutory right but right to live and liberty is fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Corollary to it, it is citizen's right to possess firearms for their personal safety to save their family from miscreants. It is often said that ordinarily in a civilised society, only civilised persons require arms licence for their safety and security and not the criminals. Of course, in case the government feels that the arms licence are abused for oblique motive or criminal activities, then appropriate measure may be adopted to check such malpractice. But arms licence should not be suspended in a routine manner mechanically, without application of mind and keeping in view the letter and spirit of Section 17 of the Arms Act".
Chandrabali Singh vs D.D.C. Faizabad And Others on 10 May, 2010
In Chandrabali Tewari Vs. the Commissioner, Faizabad, 2014 (32) LCD 1696, it has been held that "mere pendency of criminal case is no ground to cancel fire arm licence. It has also been held that as in that case there were no allegations that the licenced gun was ever taken out by the licensee and was used in the act, the order canceling petitioner's fire arm licence was quashed".
Indrajeet Singh vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 22 October, 2021
16. However, learned Standing Counsel has tried to support the impugned orders and placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Indrajeet Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ-C No.4947 of 2019, decided on 22.10.2021 wherein relying upon the judgment given in the case of Deputy Inspector General of Police and another Vs. S. Samuthiram, (2013) 1 SCC 598, it has been held that "the expressions 'honorable acquittal', 'acquitted of blame', 'fully exonerated' are unknown to the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Penal Code, which are coined by judicial pronouncements. It is difficult to define precisely what is meant by the expression 'honorably acquitted'. When the accused is acquitted after full consideration of prosecution evidence and that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can possibly be said that the accused was honorably acquitted".
Dy.Inspector Gen.Of Police & Anr vs S.Samuthiram on 30 November, 2012
16. However, learned Standing Counsel has tried to support the impugned orders and placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Indrajeet Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ-C No.4947 of 2019, decided on 22.10.2021 wherein relying upon the judgment given in the case of Deputy Inspector General of Police and another Vs. S. Samuthiram, (2013) 1 SCC 598, it has been held that "the expressions 'honorable acquittal', 'acquitted of blame', 'fully exonerated' are unknown to the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Penal Code, which are coined by judicial pronouncements. It is difficult to define precisely what is meant by the expression 'honorably acquitted'. When the accused is acquitted after full consideration of prosecution evidence and that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can possibly be said that the accused was honorably acquitted".
Chhanga Prasad Sahu vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors. on 18 January, 1984
In Chhanga Prasad Sahu Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1984 AWC 145 (FB), after noticing the provisions of Section 17(3) of the Arms Act the Full Bench in paragraphs-5 and 9 held as follows:
Raj Kumar Verma vs State Of U.P. And Others on 11 March, 2022
In the case of Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P, 2013 (80) ACC 231 this court in paragraph No.3 held as under:-