VIKASH NARAYAN SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Utsav Kumar, learned AC to Mr. Partha Sarthi, learned GA-4.

(2.) The Writ application has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 16/10/2015 passed by respondent no. 3, District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, whereby petitioner's application for grant of N.P. Bore Revolver licence has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not been able to explain as to what kind of threat perception is being faced by the petitioner, when he was called for the interview and that in the police report also no specific circumstance concerning arms threat perception to the petitioner, has come forth. The prayer has also been made for a direction to the licensing authority to grant N.P. Bore Revolver licence to the petitioner.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate of Civil Court, Muzaffarpur and is at present Additional Public Prosecutor. The petitioner is having a double barrel gun licence from before. In order to have adequate security for the safety of life and property of the family, the petitioner submitted an application for grant of N.P. Bore Revolver on 19/6/1996, as contained in Annexure-P/1. Vide Memo No. 192 dtd. 19/6/1996, the Station House Officer of Muzaffarpur Sadar Police Station was directed to send verification report after proper verification. After proper verification the Station House Officer transmitted the report to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur on 24/8/1996. The same was forwarded with recommendation for grant of licence by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur on 25/8/1996, but in spite of that several years passed, but the application of the petitioner was kept pending and ultimately the petitioner filed writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 13039 of 2005 before this Court. During the pendency of the writ application the respondent no. 3 passed order dtd. 28/2/2006, as contained in Annexure-P/2, whereby the petitioner's application for grant of N.P. Bore Revolver was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is already holding a licence of double barrel gun which is sufficient for the safety of the petitioner. The said order dtd. 28/2/2006 passed by District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur was challenged by the petitioner in Arms Appeal No. 36 of 2006 before respondent no. 2, Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, who dismissed the appeal of the petitioner in Arms Appeal No. 36 of 2006 vide order dtd. 1/11/2006 on the ground that the petitioner has challenged the order of the District Magistrate before this Court. A Bench of this Court after hearing the counsel for the parties deprecated the manner in which the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the District Magistrate and vide order dtd. 26/7/2013, quashed the order of the District Magistrate dtd. 28/2/2006 order dtd. 1/11/2006 passed by Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffapur as contained in Annexure- 5 and 6 and remanded back the matter to the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur to consider the matter afresh, within a reasonable time frame. The relevant portion of the order reads as under:-