Writ petition by an arms license holder challenged the cancellation of his license. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the licensing authority's and appellate court's findings that the petitioner had a criminal antecedent history and abused the weapon.
None. The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19095 of 2017 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Mishra @ Putti Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brij Kumar Saroj,Pradeep Mishra,Ram Surat Saroj Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Ram Surat Saroj, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
By the impugned order dated 10.01.2011 the arms license of the petitioner has been cancelled. The appellate court has affirmed the order of cancellation in the impugned order dated 09.02.2017. The proceedings against the petitioner were instituted for cancellation of arms license by issuance of a show cause notice dated 10.06.2010. The petitioner submitted his reply on 05.07.2010.
The impugned order dated 10.01.2011 records that the police report submitted by the concerned police authorities assert that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and is deeply involved in various criminal activities. The criminal cases against the petitioner which were subject matter of the enquiry by the licensing authority extracted in the impugned order are these:-
"(i) Case Crime no. 707/09 under Sections 323, 504, 506,
325 IPC.
(ii) Case Crime no. 790/09 under U.P. Control of Goondas Act.
(iii) N.C.R. no. 126/09 under Sections 323, 504 IPC.
(iv) Case Crime no. 376/10 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1) of S.C./S.T. Act."
The report further asserts that the licensee is one strong man of the area who is prone to misusing the license and disturbing peace and order of the area. The licensing authority upon a thorough consideration of the aforesaid material and reply of the petitioner found that the petitioner was involved in a large number of criminal cases. The reply of the petitioner that he was falsely implicated in all the cases was disbelieved. The licensing authority also noticed that the petitioner had misused his weapon in a number of cases and assaulted various persons with the butt of the fire arm.
A chargesheet has been filed by the police authorities in the aforesaid cases. Further the petitioner has also
misused his weapon while threatening a person belonging to scheduled caste category. On this footing the licensing authority found that the petitioner was habituated of misusing his weapon.
The second argument of the petitioner before the licensing authority that a show cause notice and suspension of the license could not be done on the same day, was also rejected. In this regard the licensing authority found both the show cause notice as well as suspension order were issued on the same day in the interest of maintaining public peace and tranquillity. The authority finally found that in light of the past conduct and future possibilities of misuse the arms license, could not be retained by the petitioner. The licensing authority accordingly proceeded to cancel the arms license of the petitioner.
It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been acquitted in two of the four cases. This does not help the petitioner since other two cases against the petitioner are still pending. Secondly the acquittal of the petitioner in one of the case was on account of witness turning hostile. The injured witness initially supported the prosecution story had named the petitioner as prime
accused in the assault. The said witness subsequently resiled from the said version. The said witness was declared hostile by the court.
The appellate court agreed with the findings of the licensing authority and rendered the impugned order dated 09.02.2017 and affirming the cancellation order passed by the licensing authority.
No procedural impropriety has been established before this court. The authority adhered to principles of natural justice while passing the order of cancellation of the petitioner. The show cause notice has not been appended to the writ petition. The authorities below have on the foot of the credible material found that the petitioner had misused the license and threatened public peace and tranquillity. Further the retention of the fire arm by the petitioner would be detrimental to public peace and security. The conclusions reached by the authorities below are reasonable.
No perversity in the aforesaid findings was shown on behalf of the petitioner. The impugned orders are not liable to be interfered with.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.10.2021 Pravin
Anil Kumar Mishra @ Putti Mishra
State Of U.P.
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
