HEMANTSINH NARSINH JHALA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 17. 08. 2003, passed by respondent no. 2-Deputy Secretary in Weapon Appeal No. 177/2001, whereby respondent no. 2 has dismissed the appeal with a direction to deposit the weapon with the Shahibaug Police Station.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioner being in the business of stock exchange and jewellery, had preferred an application for arms licence before respondent no. 1. Respondent no. 1 after considering the application of the petitioner granted arms licence bearing No. 1319/shahibaug and since then the petitioner is holding the said licence. 2. 1. On 13. 08. 2000, a complaint came to be filed by one Rajubhai Sindhi against the petitioner, on account of some scuffle with regard to taking of unlawful possession of the premises. The said complaint was registered as C. R. No. 382 of 2002 before the Navarngpura Police Station. In view of the said complaint, respondent no. 1 issued show cause notice to the petitioner, calling upon him as to why his arms licence should not be cancelled in view of the provisions of Section 17 (3) of the Arms Act, 1962. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice vide letter dated 05. 12. 2000. The respondent no. 1 vide order 12. 03. 2001, cancelled the arms licence of the petitioner in view of the provisions of Section 17 (3) (b) of the Arms Act. 2. 2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 177 of 2001 before the respondent no. 2-State Government. However, respondent no. 2, vide order dated 17. 08. 2002, disposed of the said appeal, with a direction to deposit the arm with the Shahibaug Police Station. Hence, this petition.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. By efflux of time, the proceedings pending against the petitioner might be over. As the petitioner is involved in the business of jewellery and stock exchange, there is constant threat to this life. Therefore, if a fresh application is preferred by the petitioner for an Arms licence, then the same shall be considered by the concerned authority in accordance with law, without being influenced by the fact that this Court has not entertained the present petition and that earlier respondent no. 1 had cancelled his arms licence.