LAWS(RAJ)-2016-11-25

NAJIR MOHAMMED SON OF SHRI SHAFI MOHAMMED, BY CASTE MUSALMAN, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF PEETHALWADI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH THE HOME SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR.

Decided On November 10, 2016
Najir Mohammed Son Of Shri Shafi Mohammed, By Caste Musalman, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of Peethalwadi Appellant
V/S
State Of Rajasthan Through The Home Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan,Jaipur. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the present writ petition is for quashing of the order dated 22.10.2008 passed by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh and the order dated 1.12.2009 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, vide which the licence of the petitioner was cancelled, with a further prayer that licence be now renewed.

(2.) The petitioner was granted an arms licence No.114/1997 issued by the competent authority. After issuance of the licence, the petitioner purchased a M.L. Gun DB 2488 and since then the same is lying with him for the object and purpose for which the aforesaid arm licence was issued. Before expiry of the term of renewal of the licence, the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh moved an application before the Court of Collector cum District Magistrate that some cases against the petitioner are pending in various courts and therefore, the arms licence issued to the petitioner be cancelled. A notice was also issued to the petitioner. He duly replied to the notice stating therein that cases were simple in nature and therefore registration of the cases in itself is not sufficient to cancel the arms licence issued to the petitioner. However, the said licence was nevertheless cancelled vide order dated 22.10.2008 passed by the Collector cum District Magistrate, Pratapgarh. The Divisional Commissioner also dismissed the appeal of the petitioner vide order dated 1.12.2009.

(3.) Two cases were registered against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 143,149 and 288 Penal Code in which only penalty of fine was imposed. The second case was registered under Sections 148, 341, 323, 427, 325/149 Penal Code and the petitioner was duly acquitted in the said case although on the basis of compromise. He has also been acquitted for the offence under Sections 148 and 149 Penal Code giving him the benefit of doubt.