RANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the impugned order dated 24. 6. 2005 passed by the District Collector, Jaipur, the aforesaid two writ petitions have been filed by petitioner Ranjeet Singh questioning non-renewal of his arms licence. In the first Writ Petition No. 3513/2004, challenge has been made to the letter dated 22. 4. 2004 by which the authorised arms dealer, M/s Jindal and Company, Panch Batti, M. I. Road, Jaipur, with whom the petitioner had deposited his licensed arm viz. one 12 Bore DBBL Gun No. 75623 and. 32 Bore Revolver No. B-1872 at the time of election, was directed not to return these weapons to the petitioner without prior permission of the Police Station, Mahesh Nagar. Under challenge in the second Writ Petition No. 5635/2005 however is the order of the District Collector dated 24. 6. 2005 whereby he cancelled the licence of the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid two weapons and ordered their forfeiture. Since in both the writ petitions, dispute pertains to the same person and with regard to the same weapons, they have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) IN the first writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia contended that he being a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Lambakala in Panchayat Samiti Todarai Singh of District Tonk, is a prominent figure of the society and therefore requires arms for his self defence and security of his family. He applied for and was granted two licenses on which basis he purchased one 12 Bore DBBL Gun No. 75623 by Bharat Small Arms - Made in INdia and one. 32 Bore Revolver No. B-1872 by IOF. These licenses were granted to him in the year 1993 and were valid upto December, 2005. During Parliament Elections of 2004, SHO, Police Station, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur required him to deposit these two arms with the authorised arms dealer and accordingly the petitioner deposited them with M/s Jindal & Company, Panch Batti, MI Road, Jaipur on 5. 4. 2004. Even before the petitioner could recollect the weapons after the election, SHO, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur vide communication dated 22. 4. 2004 directed the aforesaid arms dealer not to return them back to the petitioner. When the petitioner approached the arms dealer on 11. 5. 2004, he was informed about the aforesaid letter. The second writ petition was filed after the order of cancellation of licenses and forfeiture weapons was passed by the District Collector.

(3.) I have given my earnest consideration to the rival arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and scrutinised the material on record.