Rejeesh.R vs The District Magistrate

Kerala High Court

Rejeesh.R vs The District Magistrate on 21 May, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                        PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
 TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
                WP(C) NO. 41951 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         REJEESH.R
         AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. M.RADHAKRISHNAN,
         NAKSHATRA SARAYU NAGAR, OLAVAKKODE
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678002.

         BY ADVS.
         SAJI KURIACHAN
         M.R.NANDAKUMAR
         JAYAPRAKASH NARAYANAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
         OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
         CIVIL STATION P.O.
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN - 678001.

    2    THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
         OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678001.

         BY ADV.SRI.S.GOPINATHAN, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP       FOR
ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.41951/2023
                                       :2:




                           N. NAGARESH, J.

          `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                      W.P.(C) No.41951 of 2023

          `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024


                            JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~ The petitioner, who is an applicant for Arms licence, is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P2 and direct the 1st respondent-District Magistrate to grant licence to the petitioner to hold additional weapons.

2. The petitioner states that he has applied for grant of Arms licence as per Ext.P1. The 2 nd respondent-District Police Chief reported that the petitioner is not facing imminent threat to his life or property and that the petitioner is having a Fire Arm in his name. Based on the said report of the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent rejected the application of the petitioner as per Ext.P2. W.P.(C) No.41951/2023 :3:

3. The petitioner states that the 1 st respondent has passed Ext.P2 order on the basis of Ext.P3 Circular dated 14.09.2010. According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 order of the 1st respondent is against the provisions of the Arms Act and Rules. The 1st respondent has no authority to deny grant of additional weapon to the petitioner. The 1 st respondent has not considered the requirement and need of the petitioner. Ext.P2 is therefore liable to be quashed.

4. The Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that on receiving the application from the District Collector, the same was forwarded to the Station House Officer for enquiry and report. The Station House Officer reported that the petitioner is not facing imminent threat. The petitioner already holds a Fire Arm licence.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

:4:

6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is already holding a Fire Arms licence. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P1 application under Section 3(2) of the Arms Act, 1959 for additional weapon to the existing licence. It appears that the application was rejected as per Ext.P2 based on Ext.P3 Circular dated 14.09.2010.

7. Ext.P2 would indicate that the application of the petitioner is rejected also on the basis of a report of the District Police Chief which indicated that nothing could be collected substantiating the request for acquisition of additional Fire Arm by the petitioner. The District Magistrate came to the conclusion that the petitioner is not facing imminent threat to hold two weapons. From the pleadings of the case, it is seen that the petitioner is member of the Palakkad District Rifle Association. Ext.P7 is a certificate issued by the Palakkad District Rifle Association to this effect.

8. Ext.P8 certificate would indicate that the petitioner is active life member of the Palakkad District Rifle W.P.(C) No.41951/2023 :5: Association and that he is a shooter who practices at Palakkad District Rifle Association Range regularly.

9. This Court has held in the judgment in Chandran Nair v. Additional District Magistrate [2015 (1) KHC 351] that an applicant for licence or for renewal of licence under the Arms Act need not establish that there exists threat to the life or property to get the licence applied for or to get the existing licence renewed. In the case of the petitioner, apart from the requirement of Arms licence to protect his life, the petitioner is a member of the Palakkad District Rifle Association. The petitioner is a shooter who practices at Palakkad District Rifle Association Range regularly. These aspects are not seen considered by the District Magistrate in Ext.P2 order, which is solely based on a report given by the District Police Chief.

10. In the facts of the case, I am of the view that the District Magistrate shall consider the application submitted by the petitioner afresh in the light of Chandran Nair (supra) and also in the light of Exts.P6 to P8 documents. W.P.(C) No.41951/2023 :6:

11. Ext.P2 is therefore set aside. The 1 st respondent is directed to reconsider Ext.P1 application submitted by the petitioner taking into account the judgment of this Court in Chandran Nair (supra) and taking into consideration Exts.P6 to P8 documents.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/13.05.2024 W.P.(C) No.41951/2023 :7: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41951/2023 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 23.09.2023.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.11.2023.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.76689/F1/09/HONE DATED 14-09-2010. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 25770 OF 2016 DATED 04RO8-2016.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.10.2022 IN W.P.(C) NO.24416 OF 2022.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.01.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT/ PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7              TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO
                        THE   APPLICANT/PETITIONER    BY    THE

PALAKKAD DISTRICT RIFLE ASSOCIATION DATED 15.01.2023.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 25.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT RIFLE ASSOCIATION TO THE APPLICANT/PETITIONER.