Disposed

Brajesh Singh v. State of U P and Another

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2018WRIC/24566/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court set aside the refusal to consider a firearm license application. It directed the petitioner to file a fresh application under Arms Rules 2016 and ordered the Licensing Authority to decide it on merits via a reasoned order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioner to file fresh application under Arms Rules 2016; Authority to consider it on merits with reasoned order within 3 months.

Brajesh Singh Vs State of U P and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24566 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Brajesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Usha Srivastava,Lal Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶5

The instructions supplied by learned Standing Counsel is taken on record.

¶6

A perusal thereof indicates that initially the application seeking grant of license moved by the petitioner was rejected by District magistrate, Banda vide order dated 6.11.2008 on the ground that petitioner has not been able to prove that he was victim of crime or he has threat perception.

¶7

It appears that the said order was set aside in appeal vide order dated 15.10.2009 and the matter was remitted back to the Licensing Authority for fresh consideration. It appears that, thereafter, the matter has been kept pending. In the instructions supplied by learned Standing Counsel, it is sought to be submitted that pursuant to a decision of this Court dated 7.10.2013 in Writ Petition No.3268 M/B (Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors.), the petitioner is not entitled for consideration for grant of license as it is not the case of grant of license on inheritance, victim of crime or the requirement for the purpose of shooting competition at the national and international level.

¶8

The reasoning given by the District Magistrate, Banda for nonconsideration of claim of the petitioner on the basis of judgment and order dated 7.10.2013 and the Government Order dated 14.3.2016 (issued pursuant thereto) is rebutted by learned counsel for the petitioner with the assertion that the said reasoning given by the District Magistrate, Banda cannot be sustained. Moreso, in view of the fact that the Division Bench of this Court in Misc. Bench No.828 of 2015 (M/S Agarwal Brothers Chowk Bazaar Thru. Proprietor & Anr. v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home & 2 Ors.) along with other connected writ petitions has issued directions to the concerned Authorities to consider all applications independently without being influenced by any observations made in the judgment and order dated 7.10.2013, strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Arms Rules, 2016.

¶9

It is noteworthy that while issuing the said directions, the Division Bench of this Court has noted that with the promulgation of the Arms Rules, 2016, the directions issued by this Court in the judgment and order dated 7.10.2013 have duly been complied with. After promulgation of the Rules, the Licensing Authorities are required to consider each application on merits, strictly in accordance with the requirements of the Arms Rules, 2016.

¶10

The said legal position is admitted to learned Standing Counsel.

¶11

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the parties, the present petition is being disposed of with the directions as follows:-

¶12

(1) The petitioner shall move a fresh application seeking grant of fire-arm license in accordance with the Arms Rules, 2016 in the prescribed format under the Arms Rules, 2016 within a period of three weeks along with certified copy of this order.

¶13

(2) In case such an application is moved, the Licensing Authority would be under obligation to consider the same and take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Arms Rules, 2016 by passing a reasoned and speaking order, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of the said application.

¶14

Order Date :- 3.8.2018 Jyotsana

Brajesh Singh v. State of U P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brajesh Singh v. State of U P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra Pratap Singh Vs the Commissioner Under Employees Compensation Act / Deputy Labour Commissioner, and 4 Others

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Renukansal and 3 Others

M/S Jvl Agro Industries Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Virendra Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 21 Others

Radhey Shyam Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another