VIPIN ALIAS VIPENDRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents.

(2.) Writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.4.2011, passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting appeal of petitioner confirming the order dated 3.5.2010. passed by Collector cancelling firearm licence of pctitioner. Learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that the impugned order of cancellation was initially passed on account of his involvement in a Criminal Case No. 176 of 2009, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 504, I.P.C. and Section 7. Criminal Law Amendment Act wherein petitioner was ultimately acquitted by trial court and, therefore, impugned order of cancellation is wholly illegal and shows non-application of mind.

(3.) However, I do not find it a fit case for interference. Impugned cancellation order clearly shows that it is not only involvement of petitioner in the aforesaid criminal case but police report was submitted showing that petitioner is a person having mens rea and is likely to create law and order problem. The aforesaid police report has been submitted considering the background in which the aforesaid criminal case has arisen wherein he was though acquitted but. by giving benefit of doubt since the witnesses turned hostile and did not identify the petitioner. It was a broad day light incident in front of several persons, yet. nobody came forward to adduce evidence.