[Cites 23, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rakesh Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
1 WP-37679-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
WRIT PETITION No. 37679 of 2025
RAKESH BAGHEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Virendra Singh Pal - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Sohit Mishra - Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.
Reserved on : 12/02/2026
Delivered on : 19/02/2026
ORDER
1. With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India takes exception to the order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the District
Magistrate, Gwalior whereby, the arms licence of the petitioner was
cancelled on account of he being embroiled in several criminal cases and in
terms of powers conferred upon the District Magistrate under Section 17(3)
of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. The petition also challenges the order dated 12.05.2023 passed by
the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior whereby, the appeal preferred
by the petitioner against the order dated 22.09.2022 has been rejected and the
order of cancellation has been affirmed.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
2 WP-37679-2025
impugned order dated 22.09.2022 apart from being violative of principles of
natural justice i.e. having been passed without affording any opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner, is based upon registration of Crime No.248/2005
for offences under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 of IPC, Crime No.117/2019
for offences under Sections 336, 294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC, Crime
No.184/2019 for offences under Sections 341, 336, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and
Crime No.149/2022 for offences under Sections 307, 294, 34 of IPC.
5. He submits that vide judgment dated 10.11.2006 (Annexure P/4),
the petitioner was acquitted in the first case; vide judgment dated 07.04.2021
(Annexure P/6), he was acquitted in the second case; vide judgment dated
17.03.2025 (Annexure P/7), he was acquitted in the third case and vide
judgment dated 17.05.2025 (Annexure P/8), he was acquitted from the
offences under Sections 307, 294, 34 of IPC and therefore, the very
foundation on which the order of cancellation of arms licence was passed by
the District Magistrate has been found to be baseless.
6. He further submits that merely on the basis of apprehensions and
the report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, arbitrarily the arms
licence of the petitioner has been canelled. The appeal preferred by the
petitioner has also not been appropriately dealt with and has been rejected
vide order dated 12.05.2023 in a mechanical manner. It is submitted that the
reasons assigned in the impugned orders do not fulfill the requirement of
Section 17(3) of the Act of 1959.
7. In support of his contentions, he places reliance on the order dated
26.07.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Jabalpur in W.P.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
3 WP-37679-2025
No.14898/2012: Chand Khan vs. State of M.P. and Ors., order dated
29.11.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Indore in W.P.
No.37116/2024: Mohanlal vs. The State of M.P. and Ors., order dated
05.08.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Indore in W.P.
No.18819/2019: Vikram Singh vs. Home Department and Ors. and order
dated 13.11.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Indore in
W.P. No.14032/2022: Ansar Khan vs. The State of M.P. and Ors. He submits
that since the facts of the case of the petitioner are identical, the petition
deserves to be allowed.
8. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State by
referring to the report submitted by the Superintendent of Police dated
24.08.2022 (Annexure R/1), submits that not only, the petitioner was found
to be involved in a number of criminal cases but, there were allegations
against him regarding misuse of arms licence in the said criminal cases. It is
further submitted that in the recommendation made by the Superintendent of
Police, it has also been stated that the petitioner was involved in illegal
transportation of sand and therefore, continuation of the arms licence of
petitioner would be pre-judicial to the maintenance of public peace and
public safety. On the basis of the said recommendation, the impugned order
has been passed.
9. He further submits that this Court in the case of Hardeep Kumar
Arora vs. State of M.P. and Ors. decided on 8.9.2025 in W.P.
No.71/2012, has taken a view that no person has a vested right to claim an
arms licence or to possess a firearm and that the grant thereof is subject to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
4 WP-37679-2025
the satisfaction of the competent authority. In the instant case, the competent
authority has recorded its satisfaction for cancellation of the arms licence
issued to the petitioner, which fulfills the requirement of Section 17 (3) of
the Act of 1959.
10. Though the factum of non-grant of opportunity to the petitioner
prior to passing of the order impugned by the District Magistrate is not
specifically denied in the return, learned counsel appearing for the State
submits that having regard to the material available on record, even if the
petitioner had been afforded an opportunity of hearing, the ultimate
conclusion would not have been different.
11. In support of his submissions, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents places reliance on the order dated 28.01.2013 passed in
Digambar Singh vs. State of M.P. , 2013 SCC OnLine MP 748, W.P.
No.14983/2017 (Shivraj Singh Yadav vs. State of M.P. ), W.P.
No.12368/2020 (Awadh Narayan vs. State of M.P. and Ors. ) and the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Aligarh Muslim University vs.
Mansoor Ali Khan, AIR 2000 SC 2783.
12. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
13. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
14. The perusal of the order dated 22.09.2022 indicates that on
account of implication of the petitioner in four criminal cases and
apprehension of misuse of the arm possessed by him, the order of
cancellation of arms licence of the petitioner was passed by the District
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
5 WP-37679-2025
Magistrate on 22.09.2022, which order has been affirmed by the appellate
authority vide order dated 12.05.2023 (Annexure P/1).
15. The specific ground taken by the petitioner as regards his
acquittal in all the criminal cases is not disputed by the respondents in their
return. The petitioner has placed reliance upon the order dated 26.07.2024
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Jabalpur in W.P.
No.14898/2012; Chand Khan vs. State of M.P. and others wherein, in
somewhat similar circumstances, the Coordinate Bench of this Court held as
under:-
"6. Section 17(1)(3) of Arms Act reads as under:
"17. Variation, suspension and revocation of
licences.―
(1) XXX
(2) XXX
(3) The licensing authority may by order in writing
suspend a licence for such period as it thinks fit or revoke a
licence,―
(a) if the licensing authority is satisfied that the
holder of the licence is prohibited by this Act or by
any other law for the time being in force, from
acquiring, having in his possession or carrying any
arms or ammunition, or is of unsound mind, or is
for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act; or
(b) if the licensing authority deems it necessary for
the security of the public peace or for public safety
to suspend or revoke the licence; or
(c) if the licence was obtained by the suppression
of material information or on the basis of wrong
information provided by the holder of the licence
or any other person on his behalf at the time of
applying for it; or
(d) if any of the conditions of the licence has been
contravened; or
(e) if the holder of the licence has failed to comply
with a notice under sub-section (1) requiring him
to deliver-up the
licence."
7. It is well established principle of law that mere registration
of an offence may not be a good ground to suspend or revoke
the Arm licence but a satisfaction has to be recorded by the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
6 WP-37679-2025
licensing authority that the continuation of Arm licence is
necessary for security of public peace and public safety.
According to petitioner, three criminal cases were registered
against him and in all three cases, he has been acquitted. The
judgment on which petitioner has placed reliance indicates
that all the witnesses have turned hostile. On one hand the
Arm licence of the petitioner was cancelled but still the
prosecution could not prevent its own witnesses from turning
hostile.
8. Be that whatever it may.
9. Once the petitioner has already been acquitted in all the
criminal cases, which were registered against him therefore,
the satisfaction recorded by the Commissioner, Sagar
Division Sagar that on account of preventive measures,
which were taken against petitioner, there is a possibility of
breach of public safety and public peace, cannot be accepted.
10. Accordingly, orders dated 17.02.2009 passed by District
Magistrate, Panna in case No.212/B-121/year 2007-08 and
order dated 31.07.2012 passed by Commissioner, Sagar
Division Sagar in Appeal No.167/B-121/weapon/2008-09 are
hereby set aside........
16. The facts of the present case are identical to that of the order
passed in the case of Chand Khan (supra) . By the acquittal of the petitioner
in the criminal cases, the apprehension raised by the Collector in the order
impugned, as affirmed by the appellate authority, no longer exists. That
apart, the order dated 22.09.2022 was passed by the District Magistrate
cancelling the arms licence of the petitioner without issuing any show-cause
notice and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
17. In view of the above consideration, the order dated 22.09.2022
passed by the District Magistrate and the appellate order dated 12.05.2023
passed by the Commissioner are hereby quashed.
18. Looking to the fact that the period of the arms licence of the
petitioner stood expired on 31.12.2023, it shall be open for the petitioner to
seek renewal of the arms licence and, in case any such application is made
by the petitioner, the same shall be considered by the respondent No.2 based
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5754
7 WP-37679-2025
upon the report to be submitted by the Superintendent of Police, which shall
also include the current status of involvement of the petitioner in any
criminal case registered against him, if any, and, depending upon the same,
appropriate decision shall be taken by the respondent No.2 in accordance
with law.
19. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed and disposed of.
20. All pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
Van
