HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?AFR Court No. - 27 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18164 of 2008 Petitioner :- Chandra Babu @ Chandra Shekhar Respondent :- The Commissiner Chitrakoot Dham Mandal & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Ram Kishor Gupta, Dharampal Singh Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. Pleadings have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being finally disposed of.
By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the judgment and order dated 27.7..2007 passed by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur cancelling the fire arm license of the petitioner as well as the order dated 22.11.2007 passed by the Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dhamm Division dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The facts are that a notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') requiring him to show cause as to why the license may not be cancelled. The said notice was issued on the allegations that he is involved in case crime no. 9/87 under Section 302/341 IPC Police Station Chikasi, case crime no. 128/05 under Section 307 IPC, Police Station Chikasi, case crime no. 15/96 under Section 18/20 N. D. P. S. Act, Police Station Chikasi, case crime no. 33/1998 under Section 3 of U. P. Control of Goonda Act, Police Station Chikasi, case crime no. 59/01, under Section 110 Cr. P. C., Police Station Chikasi, case crime no. 309/06 under Section 110 Cr. P. C., Police Station Chikasi, N. C. R. No. 13/01 under Sections 323/504/506 IPC, Police Station Chikasi and case crime no. 185/88 under Section 25, Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali, Orai. Notice also stated that the petitioner wrongly gave an affidavit dated 21.1.2005 along with the application for fire arm license that no criminal case is registered against him in any Police Station throughout India and he obtained the license by giving false affidavit and suppressing material information as such it was liable to be cancelled under Section 17 (3) (c) of the Act.
In the reply to the show cause notice submitted by the petitioner, it was stated that ever since he was issued the fire arm license, no criminal case has been registered against him and that the cancellation proceedings have been initiated on a false complaint made against him on account of political rivalry. It was also stated that in case crime no. 9/87 under Section 302/341 IPC, Police Station Chikasi he has been acquitted vide order dated 15.6.1990 in Sessions Trial no. 213 of 1988, in case crime no. 128/95 under Section 307 IPC he has been acquitted vide order dated 31.1.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 345 of 1995. In respect of case crime no. 15 of 1996 under Section 18/20 N. D. P. S. Act, it was stated that the case has been decided on 7.8.2002 and he has been released by Special Judge (NDPS) Act, Hamirpur on the sentence already undergone. In case crime no. 33/98 under Section 3 of the U. P. Control of Goondas Act, the petitioner has been discharged vide order dated 10.1.2000 and in case crime no. 185 of 1988 under Section 25 of the Arms Act, the petitioner has been acquitted vide order dated 17.1.2001. With respect to case crime no. 59 of 2001 and case crime no. 309/06 under Section 110 Cr. P. C. as well as NCR No. 13/01 under Section 323/504/506 IPC, it was stated that the same were not within the knowledge of the petitioner.
The District Magistrate after considering the reply to the show cause notice submitted by the petitioner vide order dated 27.7.2007 cancelled the fire arm license. The District Magistrate has recorded in the order that the petitioner stated in the affidavit filed along with the application for grant of fire arm license that no criminal case was registered against him either in the local police station or in any police station throughout the India and on the basis of the police report submitted, he was granted license on 2.9.2006. However, subsequently when fresh enquiry was initiated on the basis of the complaint made against him, it transpired that he was involved in eight criminal cases. The said fact was not disclosed by him in the affidavit and he obtained license by concealing material information. The District Magistrate has also taken note of the fact that he has been convicted in case crim no. 15/96 under Section 18/20 N. D. P. S. Act and having a criminal history was not entitled for grant of license but the same was granted on account of improper police report and accordingly also directed to initiate proceedings against the then Station House Officer, Rath, Jhansi who submitted the earlier report. Against the order of the District Magistrate, the petitioner went up in appeal which has been dismissed vide order dated 22.11.2007. The Commissioner has observed that the petitioner obtained license by furnishing false affidavit concealing material information, thus, his license was rightly cancelled and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the basis of the cancellation of the license was his involvement in criminal cases in most of which he has been acquitted much prior to the making of the application. It is further contended that mere involvement in a criminal case or pendency of criminal case cannot be a ground of revocation of license.
Reliance in support of the contention has been placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Habib Vs. State of U. P. and others 2002 A. Cr. R. 982. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance on the judgment of the single judge in the case of Narendra Bahadur Singh Vs. State of U. P. and others [2006 (55) ACC 250] to support the contention that if the petitioner has been acquitted from the criminal case, the same cannot form basis for cancellation of the fire arm license.
Learned Standing Counsel refuting the submission made on behalf of the petitioner contended that the impugned orders are not liable to be interfered with by this Court in as much as even if the petitioner was acquitted in some of the criminal cases as alleged, still it was incumbent upon him to have disclosed the same in the affidavit filed in support of the application and since he concealed material information as such the license has rightly been cancelled. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been convicted in the case under the N. D. P. S. Act which is very serious in nature and by merely stating that he had no knowledge about the case crime no. 59/01, case crime no. 39/06 and NCR no. 13/01, he cannot escape the liability of his involvement in the said crime.
I have considered the submissions and perused the record.
The District Magistrate has cancelled the fire arim license of the petitioner not only on the ground that is involved in a number of criminal cases and has a criminal history but also on the ground that he obtained the firm arim license concealing his involvement in various criminal cases.
The basis for initiating proceedings for cancellation of arm license is subsequent report obtained after the complaint which went to show that the petitioner was involved in a number of criminal cases and had a criminal history. It is, no doubt, correct that in some of the cases the petitioner was acquitted much prior to the making of the application and in respect of some cases, there is no disclosure with respect to any final order having been passed therein. The petitioner has simply stated in his reply to the show cause notice as well as in this writ petition that the said criminal cases were not within his knowledge. It may be that those cases might not have been in the knowledge of the petitioner at that time but subsequently when the cases came to his knowledge while giving reply to the show cause notice, it was incumbent upon him to have disclosed the final outcome, if any, or the stage of the said cases.
Apart from the above, it is undisputed that the petitioner did not disclose, his involvement in various criminal cases, in the affidavit filed along with the application for grant of fire arm license. The copy of the affidavit has been filed along with the counter affidavit. A perusal of the same goes to show that in paragraph 3, it has been categorically stated that no criminal case has been registered against him either in the local police station or any where in India. In paragraph 4 of the affidavit, it has been stated that no criminal case is pending against him in any court and he has no criminal history. These averments were made on oath despite full knowledge of his involvement in various criminal cases.
The fire arm license is liable to be cancelled under Section 17 (3) (c) of the Act if the same was obtained by suppression of material information or on the basis of wrong information provided at the time of making the application for grant of license. Section 17 (3) (c) is quoted below :
"If the license was obtained by the suppression of material information or on the basis of wrong information provided by the holder of the license or any other persons on his behalf at the time of applying for it."
Even though the petitioner might have been acquitted in the criminal case registered against him much prior to the making of the application for grant of license, still it was incumbent upon him to have disclosed the details of the said cases in the affidavit filed along with the application for grant of fire arm license. The petitioner having failed to disclose the same in the affidavit and rather made false averments that no case has ever been registered against him, he obtained license by suppression of material information and by furnishing wrong information and thus, the license was liable to be cancelled in view of the provisions of Section 17 (3) (c) of the Act. The cancellation of the fire arm license of the petitioner is not solely based upon his involvement in criminal cases in which he has been acquitted but the basis is obtaining license by suppression of material information and on the basis of wrong information. Thus, the aforesaid two case law of Habib (supra) and Narendra Bahadur Singh (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are of no help.
It is also not the case that the petitioner was involved in one or two case in which he was acquitted. His involvement in eight cases under different crime including one under NDPS Act clearly goes to establish that he had a criminal history, even though he might have been acquitted in some of the cases.
In view of the foregoing facts and discussions, the fire arm license of the petitioner has rightly been cancelled and the orders impugned in this writ petition do not warrant any interference.
The writ petition accordingly fails and stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to cost.
Order Date :- 19.10.2011 Dcs