RAGHUVIR SAHAI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No. 1 is a holder of an arms license for a rifle while the petitioner No. 2 has a license for a double barrel gun. They are aggrieved by an order passed by the District Magistrate, Jhansi suspending their licenses and directing them to surrender their weapons as well as to show cause why the said licenses should not be cancelled.

(2.) The District Magistrate has passed the impugned order suspending the licenses of the petitioners on the ground that on account of various reports submitted to him, he was satisfied that it was necessary for the security of public peace and safety to suspend the petitioners licenses. The order states that from the various reports submitted to the District Magistrate by the Police and other officers, it was apparent that owing to the bitterness of the local politics and groupism in the village, there was every likelihood that the petitioners would misuse the weapons held by them necessitating immediate suspension of their licenses for public peace and security.

(3.) The contention of the petitioners is that the impugned order is completely without jurisdiction inasmuch as the Arms Act under which the impugned order has been passed does not empower the District Magistrate to suspend a license pending enquiry. It was urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the said Act authorizes the District Magistrate to suspend a licence only after he is satisfied upon the material brought before him that for the security of public peace and safety, it is necessary to suspend a license, but this power is available only when the order of suspension is being passed as a final order of suspension for a specified period and not while the District Magistrate is still enquiring into the allegations or complaints against a license holder. In support, the learned counsel placed reliance on a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of CP. Sahu v. State1.