RITU RAJ AWASTHI,J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Rajiv Dubey, learned Counsel for the peti­tioner as well as learned Chief Standing Counsel and perused the record.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.10.2006 passed by the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Appeal No. 566 of 2003-04 and the order dated 15.6.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri in Case No. 695/163/102 whereby the Arms-licence No. 404/111 of D.B.B.L. Gun of the petitioner has been cancelled and the appeal preferred under section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959 has been rejected by the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that the impugned order cancelling the arms licence has been passed without proper application of mind and without appreciating the fact that the weapon in question was not used in the offence said to have been committed in which the petitioner along with other fam­ily members were named and the F.I.R. under Crime No. 112/998 under section 498-A and 304,I.P.C. read with section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was lodged. It has been further submitted that the peti­tioner is the father-in-law of deceased Smt. Pushpa Devi who had committed suicide by hanging herself from the Ceiling fan in the house of the petitioner and in this re­gard, the aforesaid criminal case was lodged against the petitioner and other family members. The petitioner does not have any criminal history and no other case was ever lodged against him and he has never misused his weapon. It has been further submitted that the authority con­cerned while passing the impugned order failed to consider the relevant material fact that the arms licence was not misused by the petitioner and in the alleged offence, the weapon in question was not used in any manner.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the peti­tioner has vehemently urged before this Court that in the case Crime No. 12/1998 registered under section 498-A, 304 IPC read with section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioner has been honourably acquitted and no other criminal case is pending against him on the basis of which he can be denied the arms-licence. It has been stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a villager and posted as Head Master in Senior Basic Vidyalaya. Shankerpur, Block-Behjam, District Lakhimpur Kheri and he had ob­tained the licence of D.B.B.L. Gun for his personal safety and protection of the prop­erty. The reasons for which the arms-licence was granted still exist and the im­pugned order has been passed in a most arbitrary and illegal manner without proper application of mind. In the appeal filed under section 18 of the Arms Act before the learned appellate authority i.e. the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow the petitioner had raised several grounds including the ground that the arms-licence of the peti­tioner was not used in the alleged offence said to have been committed under section 498-A, 304 IPC read with section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Mere filing of the FIR for the commission of the alleged of­fence did not construe the ground for can­cellation of the arms-licence. ;