Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Bhanuveer Singh Champawat vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:24636) on 29 May, 2024

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2024:RJ-JD:24636]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9566/2024

1.       Bhanuveer      Singh        Champawat             S/o     Dileep     Singh
         Champawat, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Rajput, R/o Narta
         Tehsil Binmaal, District Jalore, Rajasthan.
2.       Pradhyuman Singh S/o Mahaveer Singh, Aged About 28
         Years, B/c Rajput, R/o Village Jhab, Tehsil Chitalwana,
         District Jalore, Rajasthan.
                                                                    ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur,
         Rajasthan.
2.       District Magistrate, Jalore.
3.       Superintendent Of Police, Jalore.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Chandraveer Singh



               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

                                      Order

29/05/2024

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present

matter is squarely covered by the judgment passed by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court in Goverdhan Singh Parihar Vs.

State    of   Rajasthan        &     Ors.      (S.B.      Civil    Writ     Petition

No.4452/2019),          decided        on      10.11.2021,         alongwith     the

connected matters. The order dated 10.11.2021 reads as follows :

            "The present petitioners have a common grievance
      regarding the arms license.
            Learned counsels for the present petitioners have
      laid the grievances with regard to matters relating to
      licenses of firearms under the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter
      "the Act of 1959"), before the Court, viz. inaction and
      unjustified delay in issuance of arms license / no

                      (Downloaded on 29/05/2024 at 08:58:06 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:24636]                   (2 of 5)                    [CW-9566/2024]


      opportunity of hearing given and despite pendency of only
      one criminal case / rejected without cause or speaking
      order / renewal denied despite acquittal in criminal cases /
      renewal denied despite pending criminal case related to
      gambling and thereby not impacting public safety / no
      transfer to legal heir despite surrender of old license / no
      grant or refusal of application for license and inordinate
      delay, despite prescribed statutory time period of60 days
      asunder Schedule V, of the Arms Rules, 2016 ("the2016
      Rules").
            Learned counsels for the petitioners further submit
      that there is a statutory provision for persons to apply and
      acquire a firearm license, and thus, the respondents ought
      to maintain maximum transparency, while passing the
      orders, whereas the impugned orders have been passed
      without making any individual consideration of the
      relevant criteria.
            Learned counsel for the respondents submit that
      there is no absolute right of any person to acquire an arms
      license and the respondents have every right to objectively
      decide each case, while taking into consideration the past
      record of the person seeking such license as well as the
      pendency of proceedings, if any.
            Learned counsels for the petitioners at this stage,
      submit that it would be sufficient if the respondents are
      directed to pass fresh orders on the petitioners' cases
      individually, while keeping in the view the judgment
      rendered by a Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in
      Khem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. reported in
      2005(2) Cr. L.R. (Raj.) 907. This Court's attention is
      drawn to Para 5 of Khem Singh (supra) -

      "Mere fact that some reports have been lodged against the
      license holder is not sufficient for cancelling the license. A
      license can be revoked u/s.17 (3) if the licensing authority
      deem it necessary for the security of public peace or public
      safety. In absence of any finding that cancellation was
      necessary for public peace or public safety, such an order
      is liable to be quashed."

            Learned counsels for the petitioners also drew the
      attention of this Court towards two orders passed in
      Sarjeet Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. SB Civil
      WP No. 110/2011 and Gurdev Singh Vs. State of
      Rajasthan & Ors. SB Civil WP No. 5681/2005 this
      Court passed in 2014, and 2016 respectively. In Sarjeet
      Singh (supra), the Court observed the following-

           "There remains no quarrel in the legal position that
      pendency of a criminal case cannot be cited as aground for


                     (Downloaded on 29/05/2024 at 08:58:06 PM)
 [2024:RJ-JD:24636]                   (3 of 5)                    [CW-9566/2024]


      cancellation / suspension of Arms License under Section
      17 of the Arms Act 1959 (for short 'the Act of 1959'). The
      Division Bench of this Court in Khem Singh Vs. State of
      Rajasthan & Ors. has held that pendency of criminal case
      against an incumbent is not a ground of cancellation of
      Arms License under Section 17(3) (B) of the Act of 1959.
      The Court has further held that in absence of any finding
      that cancellation was necessary for public safety such
      order cannot be sustained."
             Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as
      perused the record of the case.
             Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959 reads as under:
      17. Variation, suspension and revocation of licences.--
      (1) The licensing authority may vary the conditions subject
      to which a licence has been granted except such of them
      as have been prescribed and may for that purpose require
      the licence-holder by notice in writing to deliver-up the
      licence to it within such time as may be specified in the
      notice.
      (2) The licensing authority may, on the application of the
      holder of a licence, also vary the conditions of the licence
      except such of them as have been prescribed.
      (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. (4) The licensing authority may also revoke licence on the application of the holder thereof. (5) Where the licensing authority makes an order varying a licence under sub-section (1) or an order suspending or revoking a licence under sub-section (3), it shall record in writing the reasons therefor and furnish to the holder of the licence on demand a brief statement of the same

[2024:RJ-JD:24636] (4 of 5) [CW-9566/2024]

unless in any case the licensing authority is of the opinion that it will not be in the public interest to furnish such statement.

(6) The authority to whom the licensing authority is subordinate may by order in writing suspend or revoke a licence on any ground on which it may be suspended or revoked by the licensing authority; and the foregoing provisions of this section shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the suspension or revocation of a licence by such authority.

(7) A court convicting the holder of a licence of any offence under this Act or the rules made thereunder may also suspend or revoke the licence: Provided that if the conviction is set aside on appeal or otherwise, the suspension or revocation shall become void. (8) An order of suspension or revocation under sub- section(7) may also be made by an appellate court or by the High Court when exercising its powers of revision. (9) The Central Government may, by order in the Official Gazette, suspend or revoke or direct any licensing authority to suspend or revoke all or any licences granted under this Act throughout India or any part thereof. (10) On the suspension or revocation of a licence under this section the holder thereof shall without delay surrender the licence to the authority by whom it has been suspended or revoked or to such other authority as may be specified in this behalf in the order of suspension or revocation."

This Court is of the opinion that any interference in rejection of grant of fresh application / refusal / renewal of license for firearms is not warranted except when extraordinary circumstances are pointed out.

Looking into the submission made by learned counsel for the parties that it would be suffice if their rights are redetermined by the respondents, while keeping into consideration the judgment rendered in Khem Singh(supra), the same is accepted. Thus, in the given circumstances, the present petitions are disposed of, while directing that each of the petitioners shall file a fresh representation within a period of 15 days from the date of obtaining the certified copy of this order and each representation shall be considered afresh by the respective District Magistrate by passing speaking orders, while keeping in mind the relevant aforementioned judgments, the existing policy of the State, strictly in accordance with law. All pending applications also stand disposed of."

2. In light of the aforequoted judgment, the present petition also

stands disposed of in the same terms.

[2024:RJ-JD:24636] (5 of 5) [CW-9566/2024]

3. Stay petition as well as all pending applications also stand

disposed of accordingly.

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

514-/Devesh/-