MUNNAWAR ALI Vs. STATE OF U P & 2 OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-429
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on March 06,2018

Munnawar Ali Appellant
VERSUS
State Of U P And 2 Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Siddhartha Varma, J. - (1.) Initially owing to the pendency of a criminal case being criminal case no. 228 of 1998 under Sections- 307, 323, 504 IPC, the petitioner's firearm licence was sought to be cancelled. However, on 7.2.2000, it was found that there was no necessity to cancel to firearm licence and the proceedings were dropped. However, again in the order 2003, after a show cause notice was issued on 1.2.2003 the petitioner's firearm licence was cancelled on 20.10.2003. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal which was allowed and the matter was remanded back on 28.12.2007 and was sent back to the District Magistrate for a fresh decision. When on 28.12.2007, the District Magistrate again cancelled the firearm licence, the petitioner filed an appeal which was, however, dismissed on 11.11.2013. Hence the instant writ petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once when it was found that the firearm licence had not to be cancelled as per the order dated 7.2.2000 then there was absolutely no necessity for reviving the proceedings, specially in view of the police report dated 24.5.2006 which was absolutely in his favour.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that mere pendency of a criminal case did not mean that possession of the firearm with the petitioner would be dangerous for the public peace and tranquility. In this regard learned counsel has cited Ram Charan vs. State of U.P. and Ors., 2017 98 AllCriC 48 and specifically read out paragraph nos. 20 and 24 which are being reproduced here as under:- "20. A perusal of the impugned order dated 4.2.2009 would show that the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled only on the ground of pendency of a solitary criminal case mentioned in the said order. It is no more res integra that mere pendency of a criminal case or apprehension of abuse of arms is not a sufficient ground for passing of an order of suspension or revocation of licence under Section 17 of the Act. 24. In view of the settled legal position mentioned above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 4.2.2009 passed by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi and the order dated 30.11.2013 passed by the Commissioner, Allahabad Mandal, Allahabad are hereby set aside";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.