VIDYADEVI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main question involved in this writ petition is as to whether the arm obtained against a valid licence, in view of the provisions of Arms Act 1958 (for short, the Act) can be directed to be deposited, even though there was no infirmity in the licence, is the short question for our determination in the present petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE relief sought in the writ petition filed by Smt. Vidhya Devi under Article 226 of the Constitution is that the impugned order dated 29th December, 1978 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) may be quashed by issuing writ of certiorari.

(3.) COUNTER-affidavit, has been filed on behalf of the State in para 4 of the counter-affidavit, the impugned order was supported, indicating that the licence of the vendor. Ram Siya Shukla has been suspended and he has not complied with the Rule 52 (2) of the Rules framed under the Act.