Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36490 of 2009 Petitioner :- Rizwan Ahmad Respondent :- Commissioner Azamgarh And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Capt Seema Singh,Vinay Kumar Singh Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
In the present case the proceedings for cancellation of fire arm
license has been undertaken against the petitioner on account of
his complicity is in case crime 283 of 2006 police Mubarakpur
district Azamgarh under section 307, 342, 504,506 IPC. The
Licensing Authority issued show cause notice, which was replied
by the petitioner and the licensing authority on account of said
complicity was not satisfied with the reply so submitted and in this
background District Magistrate proceeded to pass order of
cancellation.
Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the
said appeal in question was dismissed.
Writ petition in question has been filed by the petitioner
questioning the validity of the aforesaid orders before this Court.
On 23 July, 2009, the learned Standing Counsel was directed to
file counter affidavit. On 15th February, 2010 copy of
supplementary affidavit was duly served, wherein counsel was
asked to the order of acquittal dated 23rdth February, 2010 was also
filed and eight weeks’ further time was granted to learned standing
counsel to file counter affidavit but no counter affidavit has been
filed. Then on 26th April, 2010, six weeks and no more time was
granted to learned standing counsel to file counter affidavit.
On the matter being taken up today, no counter affidavit has been
filed and in such a situation with the consent of the parties present
writ petition is being disposed of finally.
Sri Vinay kumar Singh learned counsel for the petitioner
vehemently argued that as on date the order of cancellation as well
the order of its affirmance by the appellate forum are unsustainable
in view of the clear cut order of acquittal passed by Sessions Judge
on 23rd February, 2010 rendering the very foundation and basis of
cancellation as redundant, as such writ petition deserves to be
allowed.
Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand, contended that no
interference is required by this Court.
After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position as
emerges is that on account of complicity of petitioner in case crime
no. 283 of 2006 proceedings for cancellation had been initiated
and as the charge had been framed therein, licensing authority
proceeded to cancel the fire arm license and the appellate forum
has affirmed the order of cancellation. Order of acquittal dated
23rd February,2010 has been perused. The said order of acquittal
clearly mentions that prosecution has failed to prove the charges
levelled against the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. Once the
said criminal case has been ended in acquittal then the said
criminal case can not be made foundation and basis for retaining
the order of cancellation and order of its affirmance in such
situation and this background both the orders are quashed and set
aside. In case petitioner has subsisting valid licence and there is no
other legal impediment, his firearm be returned to him forthwith,
and in case the same has lapsed, the petitioner shall take
proceedings for renewal and the return of the fire arm would abide
by renewal proceedings.
No order as to cost.
Order Date :- 9.7.2010
SR