MAHENDRA BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a suitable writ or a direction to the State of Madhya Bharat to forbear from acting in any manner by virtue of or under the Indian Arms Act, 1878 and for an order to the District Magistrate restraining him from enforcing a notice, directing the petitioner to deposit certain arms in his possession with the officer in charge of the police station in Laxmi Ganj Lashkar.

(2.) THE petitioner stated that he is in possession of two guns, two rifles and two revolvers; that he is the owner of these arms, which were duly registered under the Gwalior State Arms and Ammunition Control Order; that in anticipation of the extension of the Indian Arms Act to this State by the Part B States (Laws Act) 1951 (Act 3 of 1951) which came Into force on 1. 4. 1951, the Madhya Bharat Government issued a notification in the Gazette dated 25. 3. 1951 directing persons in possession of fire arms to apply for licenses in accordance with the Indian Arms Act; that accordingly he applied to the District Magistrate for a license in respect of the six fire arms in his possession, that on 4. 10. 1951 the District Magistrate gave a notice to the petitioner directing him to deposit the fire arms within a week at the nearest police station. The petitioner further states that, thereupon, he made a representation to the District Magistrate and in reply the District Magistrate assured him that he would be granted the necessary licenses. The petitioner's grievance is that the District Magistrate instead of issuing the licenses again gave him a notice on 23. 12. 1952 to surrender all the arms in his possession at the nearest police station. The petitioner challenges this action of the District Magistrate and the validity of the Indian Arms Act 1873 on several grounds. The main grounds are that the Indian Anns Act, 1878 though extended to this State has not yet been brought into force and that the Arms Act being repugnant to Articles 19 (1) (f) and Article 31 of the Constitution of India is void. He prays that an order be Issued to the State and the District Magistrate of Gird restraining them from giving effect to the Act and to the notice calling upon him to surrender the arms in his possession.

(3.) THE non-applicants oppose the petition. In the return filed on behalf of them it is said that the Indian Arms Act, 1878 came into force in this State on 1. 4. 1951 under a notification issued by the Central Government under Section 1 (2), Part B States (Laws) Act, bringing the latter Act and the several Acts and Ordinance 3 mentioned in the schedule to it into force with effect from 1. 4. 1951, It is admitted that in anticipation of the coming into force of the Indian Arms Act 1878 the Government of Madhya Bharat published 'a directive' to the citizens of Madhya Bharat to apply for licenses as required by that Act; that in respome to this notice the petitioner did apply for a license in respect of the six fire arms in his possession. It is further stated that the petitioner being in possession of revolvers of prohibited bore was asked to explain how he came to possess those revolvers, as under R. 7 and 31, Indian Arms Rules 1951 no license in respect of revolvers of prohibited bore could be granted unless it was lawfully procured or purchased; that the petitioner did not give any satisfactory explanation of his possession of the revolvers; that as the power of granting or refusing a license in respect of revolvers and pistols is vested under Rule 31 (1) (aa) in the Chief Secretary or any officer authorized by him, the District Magistrate subsequently reported to the Home Secretary that the petitioner could not explain satisfactorily his possession of the revolvers and was suspected of smuggling arms and ammunition, and that, therefore, no license should be granted to him in respect. of the revolvers; that the Home Secretary having been authorized by the Chief Secretary to deal and dispose of matters concerning the administration of the Indian Arms Act ,1878 considered the report submitted by the District Magistrate and came to the conclusion that no license should be granted to the petitioner and that he should be called upon to deposit all the lire arms in his possession at the nearest police station. The District Magistrate, therefore, in compliance with the orders of the Home Secretary issued a notice dated 23. 12. 1952 to the applicant calling upon him to deposit the fire arms in the Laxmi Ganj Police Station, Lashkar. The opponents deny that the Indian Arms Act, 1878 in any way interferes with the fundamental rights of the petitioner or that it is consecratory in nature. In the return it is further stated that the order dated 23. 12. 1952 directing the petitioner to deposit his arms at the nearest police station is purely an executive order passed by the appropriate authority in its discretion and as such is not open to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution.