SRIKANTH SHETTY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this petition has sought for quashing the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 23rd July, 2008 passed by the first respondent in Appeal No. HD 125 KA/2008 and also the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 18th February, 2008 passed by the second respondent.

(2.) PETITIONER is the permanent resident of Sajipa Mooda Village in bantwal Taluk. He is claiming that, he is an agriculturist, social worker and also a member of the National political party and elected panchayath president of Sajipamooda of Bantwal Taluk and he is the recipient of national Award i. e. , Nirmal Gram Puraskar from the President of India for his social work and commitment to the welfare of the villagers and public. It is his case that, he has no criminal antecedents, but unfortunately, due to his social work and association with political parties, there are some political rivals and there is a serious threat to his life and property from different corners. Therefore, in view of the same, petitioner was constrained to apply for Arms licence and his request has been considered and the arms licence has been granted to him by the jurisdictional competent authority - the second respondent herein. Be that as it may, the Police of the area is alleged to have submitted a report to the second respondent for suspension of the arms licence granted to petitioner. On the basis of the alleged report a notice has been issued to petitioner and he appeared before the second respondent argued the matter through the Counsel, to substantiate that, he has not violated any terms and conditions of the grant of Arms licence nor he has misused nor it is stated in the report of the police authority that,. he has misused the licence of the weapon held by him. Further, the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Dakshina kannada District, in his report has stated that, there are some criminal cases registered against the petitioner and due to that, he may misuse the arms licence held by him, in the days to come. Therefore, in the interest of public and to prevent any untoward incident that might happen in future, the second respondent has suspended the Arms licence granted to the petitioner, for a period of one year and directed to deposit the said weapon before the jurisdictional police authority, by its order dated 18th February, 2008 vide Annexure-B. Assailing the correctness of the order passed by second respondent, petitioner has filed an Appeal before the Appellate authority and Additional Chief secretary and Principal Secretary to government, Home Department - First respondent herein HD. 125/kaa/ 2008 and the said matter had come up for consideration before the first respondent-Appellate Authority on 23rd July, 2008 and the first respondent in turn, after affording opportunity to petitioner through his Counsel and after going through the order passed by second respondent, has dismissed the appeal, holding the order passed by second respondent dated 18th february, 2008 as just and proper. Assailing the correctness of the orders impugned, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition, seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and learned additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents.