HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 14 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41362 of 2007 Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Secy. & Ors. Petitioner Counsel :- A.K. Dixit,J.N. Mishra Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
By the instant petition the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 05.06.2007 (Annexure No.3) and 18.07.2007 (Annexure No.4) whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of arms licence has been rejected and the order of rejection was affirmed in appeal.
A bare perusal of the rejection order shows that the application was rejected on the grounds that certain columns were left unfilled and that the petitioner is a resident of A.D.A. Colony, Kalindipuram, Allahabad, where there are already 18 Arms licence holders. Against the order of cancellation, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed by a cryptic order.
Before I proceed to test the validity of the reasons assigned for rejecting the application it would be necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the Arms Act, 1959.. The relevant provisions relating to grant and refusal of licence are Sections 13 and 14. For ready reference, the said provisions are being quoted hereunder:-
CHAPTER III PROVISIONS RELATING TO LICENCES "13. Grant of licences.- (1) An application for the grant of a licence under Chapter II shall be made to the licensing authority and shall be in such form, contain such particulars and be accompanied by such fee, if any, as may be prescribed.
[(2) On receipt of an application, the licensing authority shall call for the report of the officer in charge of the nearest police station on that application, and such officer shall send his report within the prescribed time.
(2A) The licensing authority, after such inquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, and after considering the report received under sub-section (2), shall, subject to the other provisions of this Chapter, by order in writing either grant the licence or refuse to grant the same:
Provided that where the officer in charge of the nearest police station does not send his report on the application within the prescribed time, the licensing authority may, if it deems fit, make such order, after the expiry of the prescribed time, without further waiting for that report.] (3) The licensing authority shall grant--
(a) a licence under section 3 where the licence is required--
(i) by a citizen of India in respect of a smooth bore gun having a barrel of not less than twenty inches in length to be used for protection or sport or in respect of a muzzle loading gun to be used for bona fide crop protection:
Provided that where having regard to the circumstances of any case, the licensing authority is satisfied that a muzzle loading gun will not be sufficient for crop protection, the licensing authority may grant a licence in respect of any other smooth bore gun as aforesaid for such protection, or
(ii) in respect of a point 22 bore rifle or an air rifle to be used for target practice by a member of a rifle club or rifle association licensed or recognised by the Central Government;
(b) a licence under section 3 in any other case or a licence under section 4, section 5, section 6, section 10 or section 12, if the licensing authority is satisfied that the person by whom the licence is required has a good reason for obtaining the same.
14. Refusal of licences.-(1) Notwithstanding anything in section 13, the licensing authority shall refuse to grant--
(a) a licence under section 3, section 4 or section 5 where such licence is required in respect of any prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition;
(b) a licence in any other case under Chapter II,--
(i) where such licence is required by a person whom the licensing authority has reason to believe--
(1) to be prohibited by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force from acquiring, having in his possession or carrying any arms or ammunition, or (2) to be of unsound mind, or (3) to be for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act; or
(ii) where the licensing authority deems it necessary for the security of the public peace or for public safety to refuse to grant such licence.
(2) The licensing authority shall not refuse to grant any licence to any person merely on the ground that such person does not own or possess sufficient property.
(3) Where the licensing authority refuses to grant a licence to any person it shall record in writing the reasons for such refusal and furnish to that person on demand a brief statement of the same unless in any case the licensing authority is of the opinion that it will not be in the public interest to furnish such statement."
Sub section 1 of section 13 provides that an application for grant of a licence under Chapter II shall be made to the Licensing Authority in such form, containing such particulars, as may be prescribed. Sub-section 2 provides that the Licensing Authority on receipt of an application for grant of licence shall call for a report from the Officer-in-charge of the nearest police station. Sub section (2-A) of Section 13 provides that the licensing authority, after such enquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, and after considering the report received under Sub section 2 shall either grant or refuse to grant the licence.
Having given due consideration to the provisions mentioned above, I am of the opinion that if certain columns in the application for grant of licence are left unfilled then it is always open for the licensing authority to rely on a police report or to hold an enquiry. Such an enquiry may be by way of calling for additional information from the applicant. Thus, rejecting an application only on the ground that certain columns are left unfilled is not justified inasmuch as the licensing authority has power to call for further information, as well as to rely on the police report for the said purpose. I, therefore, find that the first reason for refusing the arms licence is not sustainable in law.
As regard, the second reason for rejection, i.e., that there are already 18 licence-holders in the locality, I am of the opinion that such a reason is not conceived of by section 14 of the Arms Act, 1959. It is also necessary to note that licence is personal privilege to the holder of the same. The residents of a locality, where the licence-holder resides, are not entitled to any right over the Weapon/Gun/Arms of the licence-holder. Thus, the second reason assigned by the licensing authority for rejecting the application for grant of arms licence is also unsustainable in law. In the case of Ganesh Chandra Bhatt v. District Magistrate, Almora, reported in (1993) 21 ALR 300, his Lordship Justice M. Katju, J. in paragraph 61 has observed as under:
" Very often arms licences are refused or cancelled or suspended on arbitrary or unteanable grounds. For example, sometimes an arm licence is refused on the ground that there are already some arms licences in the village and hence it would not be expedient to grant any more licences to people of that village. This is wholly arbitrary and illegal, since existence of some licences in the village can hardly be a reasonably ground to deny one a licence. In fact, it would amount to creating a monopoly in favour of existing licences."
I am in complete agreement with the aforesaid observations.
In view of the discussions made hereinabove, I find that the orders passed by the licensing authority as well as appellate authority are unsustainable in law and are liable to be set aside.
In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 05.06.2007 (Annexure No.3) and order dated 18.07.2007 (Annexure No.4) passed by the District Magistrate, Allahabad and the Commissioner, Allahabad (Division, Allahabad) respectively are hereby quashed.
In order to avoid any technical difficulty, I permit the petitioner to file a fresh application for grant of arms licence which shall be considered and disposed of by the licensing authority in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 2.12.2011 Sunil Kr Tiwari