Court No. - 28 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 53459 of 2007 Petitioner :- Ramadhin Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Dr. S.B. Singh,Rajesh Pachauri Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Sanjay Misra,J.
Heard Dr. S.B.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the respondents.
Counter affidavit filed by learned Standing Counsel is available on
record.
The petitioner claims to be licensee of DBBL Gun No. 011059
Licence No. A.R.-224/2000, which was granted in the year 2000
and has been renewed from time to time. The petitioner is
aggrieved by the order dated 13.9.2007 (Annexure-5 to the writ
petition) passed by the Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Banda,
respondent no.2, whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner against
the cancellation of his arm licence has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the impugned
order to state that there was one Criminal Case No. 118 of 2005
under Section 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act,
which was reason for cancellation of his licence. He submits that
the criminal case has been finally decided and the petitioner has
been acquitted. He states that the Case No. 118 of 2005 is actually
Case no. 118 of 1995. The other cases according to him are under
Section 151/107/116 I.P.C., which are preventive in nature and
lapse after 6 months of their initiation. He states that all the cases
under Section 151/107/116 I.P.C. have lapsed therefore, it cannot
be said that the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled on any
valid ground.
In the counter affidavit learned Standing Counsel has not denied
that the Criminal Case No. 118 of 2005 under Section 323, 504
and 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) 10 SC/ST Act has been finally decided and
the petitioner has been acquitted. Insofar as the cases under
Section 151/107/116 IPC are concerned, the respondents state that
they were preventive in nature which indicates that the petitioner is
a person who is criminal in nature and therefore, the lincece of the
petitioner required to be cancelled.
Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the
record, when there is no dispute that the criminal case under
Section 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act has
been finally decided and the petitioner has been acquitted that
cannot be a ground to cancel the licence of the petitioner. Mere
pendency of a criminal case is also not sufficient reason to cancel
the arms licence in the absence of any other valid reason. Insofar
as the proceeding under Section 151/107/116 IPC is concerned,
admittedly there are preventive in nature and now no such
proceedings are pending against the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the reason given in the
impugned appellate order for cancellation of the licence of the
petitioner is not sufficient hence the impugned order dated
13.9.2007 passed by the Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Mandal
Banda (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) is set aside. The writ
petition stands allowed.
No order is passed as to costs.
Order Date :- 10.8.2010
Lbm/-