Allahabad High Court
Peshkar Singh vs State Of U.P. Secy.Home Deptt. ... on 6 July, 2021
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 6
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 4118 of 2012
Petitioner :- Peshkar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Secy.Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lucknow And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- K.N. Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondents.
Petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.06.2005 passed by opposite party no.3/District Magistrate, Gonda and also the order dated 13.06.2012 passed by opposite party no.2/ Commissioner Devi Patan Manda, Gonda rejecting his appeal.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he was granted for license SBBL Gun No. 52406 and he never misused the weapon.He is peace living citizen. On 12.06.2001 One Mohd. Ibrahim lodged a First Information Report against Sri Kaptan Singh, Suhel Dev Singh,Jagrup Singh and others unknown persons alleging therein that his father has been done to death by causing fire arm injuries on him.
Petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. The gun of the petitioner at the time of incident, was deposited on Udayanji Virendra Ji Weapons Private Limited Tripaulis Chowk Faizabad for repairs. A police report was filed on 21.12.2001 before the District Magistrate Gonda, on the basis of aforesaid F.I.R. and the District Magistrate, Gonda issued a show cause notice on 07.01.2002 to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why his gun license be not cancelled. During the pendency of enquiry, gun license of the petitioner was also suspended and the gun was deposited with the Authority. The order of suspension of gun license dated 07.01.2002 was challenged by the petitioner in Appeal No.97 of 2002 which was partly allowed by the Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and the matter was remanded to the District Magistrate, Gonda to enqiure whether the gun of the petitioner was used in the alleged incident of Murder of Jikir Mohmmad or not. District Magistrate, Gonda again issued show cause notice on 04.09.2003. The petitioner submitted additional reply regarding deposition of his gun at Gun House on 10.06.2001. However, by impugned order dated 13.06.2005, District Magistrate, Gonda only referred to the fact as per police report that the name of the petitioner has been added after enquiry in the matter of killing of Jikir Mohammad.
District Magistrate, Gonda did not consider the evidence on record and passed the impugned order. The petitioner was accused in Case Crime no.64 of 2001 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302 I.P.C. and continuance of the gun license with him was likely to disturb public peace. Learned trial court conducted the trial in Case Crime No. 64 of 2001 and found the petitioner and other accused innocent of the alleged crime. A copy of the order passed by learned Sessions Judge dated 22.02.2011 has been filed as annexure -8 to the writ petition. After disposing of the criminal case against him, petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda where it has been stated that petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. He was not present at the place of murder as his gun has already been deposited in the Gun House which evidence has been submitted to the District Magistrate and also that the Sessions Court had acquitted the petitioner and there was no criminal case now pending against him. However Divisional Commissioner relied upon the oral argument raised by Senior Prosecution Officer that the petitioner had misused his gun.The Divisional Commissioner disregarded the judgment rendered to the learned Sessions Court and rejected the appeal on 13.06.2012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments in the cases of Babar Hussain and others Vs. State of U.P. ,2018 (3) JIC 170; Joginder Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2018(2) JIC 935; Ram Bahadur Singh Vs. Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda, 2016 (34) LCD 2811; Ram Tej Yadav Vs. Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda, 2019 (37) LCD 553 and Ram Sanehi Pandey Vs. Commissioner, 2004 (22) LCD 1643 to say that mere pendency of criminal case should not come in the way of cancellation of firearm license. The Licensing Authority has to apply its mind to conclude that the continuance of license with the licensee would endanger public security and public order.
It has also been submitted on the basis of law declared by the Coordinate Benches that once the petitioner was acquitted by the learned Sessions Court, it could not be said that he was ever involved in the case crime no.64 of 2001.
Considering the law settled by this Court by Coordinate Benches and taking into account the fact that the petitioner was acquitted by the Sessions Court on 22.02.2011 before his appeal was considered and rejected by the Commissioner on 13.06.2012; the order impugned is set aside. Consequences to follow. The writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 6.7.2021
dk/
