C.P.RAMAN NAIR Vs. ADDL.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition seeks to quash the order of the 1st respondent cancelling the petitioner's gun licence under the provisions of S.17 of the Arms Act, 1959 and the order passed on appeal by the 2nd respondent confirming the said order of the 1st respondent. Copies of these orders are Exts. P 1 and P 2. Ext. P 1 order Rives no reasons at all tot the cancellation of the petitioner's licence but merely states that Licence No. 437 ERD standing in the name of the petitioner is cancelled and struck off from the register maintained in the office. The appellate order Ext. P 2 proceeds to state that the connected records show that the licence was cancelled by the 1st respondent on the basis of the report of the police that the petitioner was likely to misuse the weapon, if he was permitted to hold the licence. It then proceeded to record:

(2.) The only ground on which the cancellation of the licence was sought to be justified was ground (b) of Sub clause (3) namely that the licensing authority deemed it necessary for the security of the public peace or public safety to revoke the licence. Sub-Clause (5) makes it obligatory on the licensing authority to record in writing the reasons for the cancelling and to furnish to the holder of the licence on demand, a brief statement of reasons unless the licensing authority was of the opinion that it will not be in public interest to furnish such statement. In this case there is nothing in the order Ext. P 1, to show that the cancellation was directed for security of the public peace or for public safety. No counter affidavit has been sworn to either, by the 1st respondent, alleging this to be the ground or reason which justified the cancellation.

(3.) If the orders are liable to be quashed, it was not contended that the petitioner was not entitled to a return of the weapon, claimed by him in this O.P. In Para.8 of his affidavit, the petitioner has alleged that the weapon was deposited by him in the Kalikavu Police Station, after the cancellation of the licence as required by the provisions of the Arms Act. As the cancellation has been found to be unjustified, the petitioner is entitled to a return of the weapon.