Disposed

Vindesh Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2019WRIC/11659/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On advice of counsel, the Court directed the State to constitute a Screening Committee to decide the petitioner's request for retaining his firearm license during the 2019 Parliamentary Elections within specified timelines, preventing immediate deposit for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of by directing respondents to frame a screening committee; petitioners advised to file application before committee within one week; no deposit for two weeks.

Vindesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11659 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vindesh Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Sunder Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Nath Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shyam Sunder Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 4 and Shri Bhupendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

¶6

Contention of the petitioner is that in view of Parliamentary Election of 2019, respondent-authorities are compelling him to deposit of his firearm.

¶7

Learned standing counsel appearing for the State has placed on record a letter of the Additional Director General of Police dated 2.2.2019 by which all the Senior Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police, throughout the State have been directed to approach the District Magistrate for constituting a Screening Committee, in regard to the deposit of fire arm license or from exempting the same to be deposited.

¶8

He has further placed before the Court a circular of the Chief Election Commissioner, U.P. dated 25.2.2019. In paragraph 2 of the said circular, it is stated that information has been received that the history sheeters and people with criminal backgrounds are having fire arms, their fire arms are required to be deposited and as such the Screening Committee was constituted, which shall consider each case and pass orders on merit.

¶9

In view of the letter of the Additional Director General of Police, U.P. dated 2.2.2019 and the circular of the Chief Election Commissioner, U.P., dated 25.2.2019, if the petitioner files an application before the Screening Committee within one week from today, the Committee is directed to consider and decide the application so filed, within one week thereafter by a reasoned and speaking order. Further, it is provided that for two weeks from today, the respondents shall not insist the petitioner to deposit the fire arm.

¶10

The writ petition is disposed of .

¶11

Order Date :- 4.4.2019 A.N. Mishra

Vindesh Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vindesh Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neetu Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Kuldeep Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bhudev Trivedi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Yusuf Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Balwant Kumar Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U P and 4 Others