VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only issue involved in this writ petition is as to whether the respondent No.3 was justified in refusing an arm Licence to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner submitted an application dated 11.01.2011 for grant of an arm licence, in order to secure his life, property and business activities. The said application was rejected vide order dated 07.03.2011, on the same ground that the petitioner did not have any specific threat. Being aggrieved from the said decision, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. The appeal was rejected on the ground that there was no specific threat to the petitioner's life or liberty, which would justify the grant of an Arms Licence to him. The Lieutenant Governor also took into consideration the report of Additional DCP-I (North-East District), stating therein that the general law and order situation in his area, including village Tahirpur, where the petitioner resides was normal and need for the arm licence, therefore, did not appear to be genuine. Being aggrieved from the said orders, the petitioner is before this Court, seeking setting aside of the order dated 18.01.2012 and a direction to respondent No. 3 to grant a fire arm licence to him.

(3.) SINCE the grant of an arm licence is regulated by a statute in certain situations, the statute prohibits grant of such a licence and there is no challenge to the constitutional validity of the Arms Act. No citizen has a fundamental right to obtain a fire arm licence and/or ammunition and, therefore, a fire arm licence cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The citizens are entitled to safeguard their life and liberty taking all such measures as are bound to them in law, but, possession and carrying of a fire arm is a privilege regulated by the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959. Section 13(3)(a) stipulates the cases in which it is obligatory for the Licensing Authority to grant such a licence. The grant of the licence is also mandated in a case where the Licensing Authority is satisfied that the applicant has a good reason to obtain the same. But, the provisions contained in Section 13 being subject to the provisions of Section 14 of the Act, no licence even in a case covered under sub-section (3) of Section 13 can be granted, if a situation contemplated in sub-section (1) of Section 14 exists. In such a case, the Licensing Authority would have no option, but to decline a licence. Section 13(3) contemplates the situations in which it is obligatory for the Licensing Authority to grant licence, whereas Section 14(1) contemplates the situation, existence of which mandates refusal of the licence even if the case of the applicant is covered under sub-section (3) of Section 13 of the Act.