Bharatsinh Pratapsinh Parmar vs State Of Gujarat

A.Y. Kogje, J

The words, "President of Taluka Panchayat" appearing in para-4 of order dated 30.01.2020 be replaced by the words, "Chairman of Executive Committee of Taluka Panchayat".

The note for Speaking to Minutes stands disposed of.

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 27.11.2018 passed by the Joint Secretary, Home Department in Arms Appeal No.647 of 2015, whereby order dated 25.08.2015 passed by the District Magistrate, Surendranagar came to be confirmed, which in turn confirmed order dated 25.11.2013 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Surendranagar. The subject matter pertains to renewal of firearm licence, which came to be rejected by the impugned orders.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an agriculturist and also a political worker. He was also holding post of President of Taluka Panchayat and therefore, looking to threat perception, firearm licence was granted to the petitioner.

2.1 It is submitted that a show cause notice came to be issued to the petitioner in 2013 as to why his firearm licence should not be cancelled and ultimately, without taking into consideration his submissions/ objections, his firearm licence came to be cancelled by order dated 25.11.2013 by the Additional District Magistrate, Surendranagar. The petitioner preferred appeal before respondent No.2-District Magistrate, who also rejected the appeal of the petitioner by order dated 25.08.2015. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred appeal before the State Government, which also came to be rejected by order dated 27.11.2018.

2.2 It is submitted that that the rejection of renewal application of the firearm license is based on irrelevant consideration as the application came to be rejected on the ground that there are number of offences registered against the petitioner. It is submitted that the authorities have not taken into consideration the fact that in some cases, the petitioner has been acquitted and in some cases, compromise has been arrived at. It is submitted that the petitioner is a leading political leader in the area and therefore, he has many political rivals and therefore, false complaints are also filed against the petitioner. It is submitted that from the date of issuance of firearm licence, the petitioner has never used that firearm. In such circumstances, renewal application ought to have been granted.

2.3 Learned Advocate for the petitioner relied upon judgment of this Court in case of Dharmendra Mahipalsingh Bhati Vs. State of Gujarat in SCA No.13612 of 2018 dated 05.12.2018, wherein, in almost identical fact situation, this Court was pleased to interfere and allow the petition. In para-9 of the judgment, this Court was pleased to observe as under:-

"9 Keeping in view the aforesaid provision contained in Section 17 of the Arms Act, if the facts of the present case are examined, the respondent no.2 issued the show cause notice to the petitioner for cancellation of licence only on the ground that FIR was registered against the petitioner. It is further stated in the said show cause notice that in the said case, learned JMFC has acquitted the petitioner by giving benefit of doubt and therefore the petitioner was asked to give explanation why licence issued to him should not be cancelled. Even in the impugned order passed by respondent no.2, though the fact of registration of FIR and acquittal in the criminal case pursuant to the FIR is mentioned, the order of cancellation of licence is passed by respondent no.2. The said order has been confirmed by the respondent no.1 in the appeal. The respondent no.2 has not cancelled the licence of the petitioner on any of the grounds mentioned in sub-section 3(a) to (e) of Section 17 of the Arms Act. At this stage, it is required to be observed that even if the licence holder is convicted by the competent criminal Court and on the basis of the said conviction, his licence of the weapon is cancelled, when the order of conviction is set aside by the appellate court, such cancellation or revocation of the licence shall become void. Whereas in the present case, the competent criminal Court has acquitted the petitioner and therefore the respondent no.2 could not have cancelled the licence issued in favour of the petitioner merely on the ground of registration of FIR against him ignoring the order of acquittal. Thus, this Court is of the view that the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities are not as per the provisions contained in Section 17 of the Arms Act. Hence, both the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities are required to be quashed and set aside."

Learned AGP opposes the grant of petition contending that when there are number of offences registered against the petitioner, this petition should not be entertained.

Having considered the rival submissions of the parties and having perused the documents on record, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner is already having firearm licence. The petitioner is also a political leader and once holding post of President of Taluka Panchayat. The authorities have refused renewal application on the ground that there are number of offences registered against the petitioner. However, the authorities have not taken into consideration the fact that in some cases, the petitioner has been acquitted and in some cases, compromise has been arrived at. Moreover, as submitted by learned Advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner, being a leading political leader in the area and as he has many political rivals, false complaints are also filed against the petitioner. Moreover, from the date of issuance of firearm licence, the petitioner has never used that firearm.

In view of the aforesaid, order dated 27.11.2018 passed by the Joint Secretary, Home Department in Arms Appeal No.647 of 2015, order dated 25.08.2015 passed by the District Magistrate, Surendranagar and order dated 25.11.2013 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Surendranagar are quashed and set aside. It is open for the petitioner to make a fresh application for renewal of licence with necessary documents to the License Issuing Authority within period of four weeks from today.The authority shall consider such application afresh, in accordance with law and after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within period of two months therefrom.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.