Kerala High Court
Sajumon K.C vs State Of Kerala on 8 November, 2024
2024:KER:83479
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024/17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 24192 OF 2020
PETITIONER:
SAJUMON K.C,
AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O.P.M.CHACKO, KIZHAKKEVATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KOTHANALLOOR (PO), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686 632.
BY ADVS.
M.V.THAMBAN
SRI.R.REJI
SMT.THARA THAMBAN
SRI.B.BIPIN
SRI.ARUN BOSE
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
COMMISSIONERATE OF LAND REVENUE,
PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN (PO),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033.
3 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 001.
4 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 001.
W.P.(C).No.24192 of 2020
2024:KER:83479
-2-
5 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KADATHURUTHY POLICE STATION, KADATHURUTHY (PO).
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 604.
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY,GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 08.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.24192 of 2020
2024:KER:83479
-3-
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 8th day of November, 2024)
The writ petition is preferred being aggrieved by the
rejection of Firearms licence and rejection of its appeal as per
Exts.P1 and P3 and seeking for a direction to set aside Exts.P1
and P3 orders.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is an Ex-
service man and had applied for a firearm licence before the
District Magistrate, Srinagar while he was serving as Naik in
the Indian Army at Sreenagar. Accordingly, the District
Magistrate, Sreenagar, Jammu and Kashmir has issued licence
to the petitioner for acquisition, possession and carrying of
pistols/revolver and its ammunition. Thereby, the petitioner
has purchased pistol manufactured by Indian Ordnance
Factory. After discharging duty from Indian Army, the
petitioner filed application before the 3 rd respondent, i.e., the
Additional District Magistrate, Kottayam for re-registration of
his firearm and licence in the State of Kerala. That was re-
registered as per order No.P-700/KTM by the Additional
District Magistrate, Kottayam up to 01.01.2016 and later, it
was renewed up to 01.01.2019. Prior to the expiry of the said
2024:KER:83479
licence, the petitioner applied to the Additional District
Magistrate, Kottayam on 14.11.2018 for renewal of his firearm
licence. However, the matter was kept pending for more than
2 ½ years and by order dated 13.03.2020, the request for
renewal of licence was rejected on the ground that the
petitioner is an accused in Crime No.1335 of 2016 of
Kaduthuruthy Police Station and District Police Chief,
Kottayam has not recommended for renewal of the Firearm
licence of the petitioner as per Ext.P1. Being aggrieved by that
the petitioner has preferred appeal before the 2 nd respondent.
That appeal was also considered after obtaining a report from
the Tahsildar as well as the report from the District Police
Chief, Kottayam. Though the Tahsildar has given a favourable
report, the appeal was rejected only on the basis of the report
submitted by the District Police Chief. The reason pointed out
for rejecting the appeal is that the nature of the Crime was
already described by the Tahsildar, but there is no discussion
with respect to the contrary report by the Tahsildar as well as
the District Police Chief.
3. I have heard Sri. R.Reji, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government
2024:KER:83479
Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel
for the petitioner produced the reported decision in Jose
Kuttiyany v. Land Revenue Commission,
Thiruvananthapuram and Others reported in [2015 (3)
KHC 831].
5. The relevant paragraph is extracted hereunder:
"The learned counsel for the petitioner would
submit a licence granted under the Arms Act cannot be
cancelled on the ground of mere involvement in a criminal
case or pendency of the criminal trial. It was argued that
apprehension of misuse of fire arm by the licensee cannot
be readily inferred on account of a mere involvement in a
criminal case. A reading of S.17 of the Arms Act would
indicate that the arms licence can be cancelled of
suspended if the licensing authority deems it necessary for
the security of the public peace or public safety to suspend
or revoke the licence. In the present case, while passing
the impugned order, none of the authorities has recorded
the finding as to how and under what circumstances the
possession of arms licence by the petitioner is detrimental
to the public peace or public security and safety. Merely
because a criminal case is pending, the provisions of S.17
of the Arms Act will not be attracted. To attract the
provisions of S.17 of the Arms Act with regard to public
peace, security and safety, it shall always be incumbent on
the authorities to record a finding that how, under what
circumstances and in what manner the possession of arms
licence would be detrimental to public peace, safety and
2024:KER:83479
security."
6. I have considered the submissions advanced by
both sides and also perused the statements filed by the 5 th
respondent. The reason considered for rejection is the report
forwarded by the District Police Chief. The facts involved in
this case is explained in Para.3, 4, 5 and 6. However, none of
the paragraphs specifically assign the direct involvement of
the petitioner herein. Even that part is not made a mention
while passing Ext.P1 as well as Ext.P3 orders by the
respective authority. Thus, there is no proper application of
mind and the order appears to be a non speaking one.
Accordingly, Ext.P3 is set aside and directs the 2nd respondent
to reconsider the appeal afresh and pass appropriate orders
within a period for three months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
ADS
2024:KER:83479
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24192/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2020
IN FILE NO.DCKTM/10325/2018-H3 OF THE
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
KOTTAYAM.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LRA
2/17556/20 DATED 16.10.2020 OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
