N.N. Mathur, J. - (1.) The instant special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.7.2003 dismissing the writ petition in limine.
(2.) Brief .facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that the appellant, a resident of Chak No. 16 LNP, Tehsil, Sri Ganganagar was granted Arms Licence No. 6/85 by the District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar in the 1985. The 3rd respondent namely Prem Singh moved an application before the District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar for cancellation of the said licence. The learned District Magistrate obtained report from the police. The Station House Officer, Lalgarh Jatan submitted a report dated 17.8.1999. As per the report there were three cases pending against the appellant. In Case No. 117/97 the appellant was convicted for offence u/s. 307 IPC and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. He was also convicted for allied offence u/ss. 447, 323, 324/34 IPC. In FIR Case No. 201/97 for offence u/s. 336 and Section 27 of the Arms Act a final report was given for want of identification. Likewise the Case No. 98/98 for offence u/ss. 365, 147, 148, 149, 323, 579 IPC was pending trial. On the basis of the said inquiry report, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant. In reply to the show cause notice the appellant submitted inter alia that the 3rd respondent made complaint mala fidely on account of village groupism. As regards the second FIR the police itself submitted a final report. Likewise in 3rd FIR the Court has taken cognizance only for offence u/s. 323 IPC. However, the learned District Magistrate considering the fact that the appellant has been convicted for offence u/s. 307 IPC and there were other cases against him cancelled the subject Arms Licence. The appellant carried the matter in appeal before the Divisional Commissioner unsuccessfully. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition challenging the order of the District Magistrate as well as of the appellate authority by the impugned order. The brief order of the learned Single Judge is as follows : "Licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that he has a criminal background. This is not denied that the petitioner stands convicted of an offence. An appeal is pending before this Court challenging the conviction. From the facts, it cannot be said that the observation of the respondents in relation of the licence of gun is perverse or unsubstantiate. The petitioner is a convict. His description of being a man with criminal background cannot be disputed. That being the position, the writ petition of the petitioner cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed."
(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel that the learned Single Judge has failed to consider that the District Magistrate has not recorded any finding to the effect that it was necessary to cancel the licence for the security of the public peace or the public safety. Mere fact that some cases have been registered against the appellant, cannot be a ground to conclude that the cancellation of the licence was necessary for the security of public peace or public safety. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Addl. Government Advocate that the material on record clearly shows that the appellant is a person with criminal background. As such the learned Magistrate was right in considering that the cancellation of the Arms Licence was necessary for the security of the public peace.;