Y S ARABHAVI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BELGAUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On May 22, 1963 the petitioner was asked by the District Magistrate, Belgaum, to show cause why the two licences authorising possession of a gun and a revolver, should not be cancelled. It was stated in that notice that the petitioner was secretly instigating certain mill workers not to make contributions to the National Defence Fund and that he intimidated certain workers with his pistol. It was also said that he indulged in criticism of Government activities in the sphere of war efforts.

(2.) At one stage from the order made by the Dist. Magistrate cancelling the licences there was an appeal and that appeal ended in an order of remand made by the Divisional Commissioner by which the District Magistrate was directed to dispose of the matter afresh after making necessary enquiries, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to make his representations. Eventually an order was made by the District Magistrate cancelling the licences. He was of the view that since the petitioner was admittedly convicted of an offence of defalcation, and that the Superintendent of Police had reported after an enquiry that the petitioner was not a fit person to be in possession of the weapons, he (the District Magistrate) himself was satisfied from the enquiries made that the petitioner was not a fit person to possess the arms.

(3.) From this order, the petitioner again appealed to the Divisional Commissioner who was of the view that the appeal could not succeed. The Divisional Commissioner who observed that in matters in which a licensing authority exercised discretion under the Arms Act, the exercise of that discretion could not be lightly disturbed. Discussing the question whether the petitioner's licences had been properly cancelled, the Divisional Commissioner observed thus: