Anil Singh Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6880 MP

                                   1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT JABALPUR
                                 BEFORE
                   HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE NANDITA DUBEY
                            ON THE 7th OF MAY, 2022

                    WRIT PETITION No. 13200 of 2018

        Between:-
        ANIL SINGH THAKUR,AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
        S/O LATE SHRI RAVINRA SINGH THAKUR , R/O
        WARD      NO.     12,   BARGHAT      TEH.
        BARGHAT,DISTT.SEONI             (MADHYA
        PRADESH)OCCUPATION- AGRICULTURE

                                                                 .....PETITIONER
        (BY SHRI AKHILESH JAIN, ADVOCATE)

        AND

1.      STATE    OF      MADHYA       PRADESH,
        COLLECTOR,SEONI, DISTT. SEONI (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

2.      THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
        SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.      THE COMMISSIONER, DIVISION JABALPUR,
        JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
        (BY SHRI AMIT SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

      This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                     ORDER

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 11.04.2018 (Annexure P/7) whereby the Licensing Authority has refused to renew his gun licence.

2. The facts of the case reveal that the petitioner was earlier granted gun licence in the year 1997, on the basis of which he purchased a 12 bore gun no.8709. On 01.12.2017, petitioner applied for renewal of his gun licence under

the Lok Guarantee Adhiniyam. However, his application for renewal was rejected by the District Magistrate-Seoni on 19.12.2017, for the reason that a Criminal Case SC ATR No.200048/2015 for offence punishable under Sections 147,186,294,353 and 506-B of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been registered and pending against him. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Arms Act before the respondent no.3 which also came to be rejected by the impugned order, hence, this petition.

3 . The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner has never misused the said arm or violated any of the terms and

conditions incorporated under the licence. It is pointed out that after 1997, the licence of the petitioner was renewed from time to time. However, vide order dated 19.12.2017, the District Magistrate refused to renew the petitioner's gun licence. His further contention is that his application for renewal was rejected without any basis. It is further pointed out that petitioner has been acquitted in the aforesaid Criminal Case vide judgment dated 23.01.2019 (Annexure-A), copy of the same has already been brought on record. It is further stated that it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner has misused the concerned arm anywhere. Under the circumstances, renewal of the licence could not have been refused by the authority concerned. Learned counsel has relied on the decisions of this Court in the cases of Dharampal Ramnarayan Agrawal vs. State of M.P. and another 1998(1) MPLJ 537 , Shishir Tiwari vs. State of M.P. and others (Writ Appeal No.1295 of 2021, order dated 13.01.2022) and Pawan Diwakar vs. State of M.P. and others (Writ Petition No.20446 of 2018, order dated 21.02.2022).

4 . Learned GA has opposed the petition . It is submitted that it is

the discretion of the licensing authority whether to renew the licence or not and such a decision should not be interfered with by the writ Court and, accordingly, he has prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5 . Having considered the rival submissions, and on perusal of documents on record, I am of the opinion that this petition deserves to be allowed for the reason that the impugned order does not record any reason as to how the registration of criminal case alone would disentitle the petitioner for renewal of the licence. It is true that the licensing authority has a discretion not to renew the licence, but while doing so, it has to be kept in mind that licence can only be rejected on the grounds mentioned in Section 14 of the Arms Act. Section 14,15 and 17 of the Act nowhere says that the renewal of licence can be refused only on the ground of registration of a criminal case. Sub-section (7) of Section 17, however, clarifies that the renewal of the licence can be refused or the application for grant of licence can be rejected, if the person concerned is convicted by the Court, which is not the case here. As aforementioned, the petitioner has already been acquitted vide judgment dated 23.01.2019 passed in SC ATR No.200048/2015 (Annexure A).

6 . In view of the aforesaid, the impugned orders dated 19.12.2017 and 11.04.2018 (Annexure P/5 and P/7) respectively are hereby set aside. The respondent/licensing authority is directed to reconsider the application of the

petitioner for renewal of the licence afresh in accordnace with the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, and pass a fresh order within a period of three months from today. While considering the application, the licensing authority will also keep in mind that the petitioner has already been acquitted from the criminal case on account of which the renewal of licence was earlier refused.

7. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.

(NANDITA DUBEY) JUDGE jk

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by JITIN KUMAR CHOURASIA Date: 2022.05.09 17:40:26 IST