LAWS(ALL)-2012-5-256

ATAR SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On May 24, 2012
Atar Singh Yadav Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Sheo Ram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the District Magistrate, Kaushambi dated 30.7.2003 and also the order dated 10.8.2004 passed by the Commissioner, Allahabad Division Allahabad.

(3.) The petitioner is licencee of DBBL gun no. 12864. The show cause notice dated 22.6.2002 has been issued upon the petitioner on the report of Superintendent of Police Kaushambi dated 1.6.2002, wherein it was stated that petitioner is a man of criminal tendency and is in habit of demonstrating his firearms to threaten the poor people. There are four cases registered against him, which are case crime no. 204 of 1984 under sections 307/302 I.P.C., case crime no. 265 of 1996, under sections 147, 148, 323, 452, 504, 506, 325, 427 I.P.C., case crime no. 30 of 2000 under sections 325, 323, 504, I.P.C. and case crime no. 148 of 2002 under sections 302, 506 I.P.C. In view of the fact that criminal cases are registered against him, petitioner's firearm licence was suspended and he was asked to deposit the same. He was further required to show cause as to why his licence be not cancelled. The petitioner has submitted his reply to the show cause notice. The District Magistrate, Kaushambi after consideration of the reply submitted by the petitioner, has observed that out of four criminal cases registered against him, in three cases charge sheet has been submitted in the court after investigation. The order of the District Magistrate, Kaushambi dated 30.7.2003 further reflects that it was brought to its notice that criminal case no. 204 of 1984 under sections 307, 302 I.P.C, has been decided and petitioner has been acquitted in the same. In another case crime no. 265 of 1996, the name of the petitioner is not there and only two cases were pending consideration. The petitioner in his reply has submitted that he never misused his arms licence. However, conclusion has been drawn by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi, that total four criminal cases registered against the petitioner, out of these cases, two cases are serious in nature. The petitioner is a man of criminal tendency and he used to indulge in criminal activities. He is not fit to retain firearms licence granted to him and there is an apprehension of misuse of the firearm licence by the petitioner. In view of that the firearms licence of the petitioner is to be cancelled for the security of public peace and public safety.