Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Court No. - 64

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9953 of 2023

Applicant :- Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. . And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The applicant has come up seeking to quash the proceedings of Case No. 10454 of 2020, State v. Dev Narayan @ Pinku (arising out of Case Crime No. 171 of 2019), under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, Police Station Sehramau Uttari, District Pilibhit, pending before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit.

¶7

The allegation in the impugned charge-sheet is about manufacturing of fake arms licenses, that were arranged in big numbers by a certain Durga Gun House at Shahjahanpur, the beneficiary whereof, were the holders of fake arms licenses. The applicant, Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku, it is reported, also got his arms license through the agency of Durga Gun House and his license too, has been found to be fake during investigation. Learned Counsel for the applicant has questioned the prosecution on the ground that whatever misdemeanour has been committed is by Durga Gun House and the applicant acted bonafide . It is also pointed out that the Arms Clerk in the Collectorate, Shahjahanpur has made false entries in the Arms Register, on account of which, the District Magistrate constituted a three member checking team and found 195 entries in the ledger book to be wrong.

¶8

The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant that, it was all a handiwork of Durga Gun House and the Arms Clerk in the office of the District Magistrate, cannot entitle the applicant to seek quashing of the impugned proceedings. The proceedings involve widespread issue of fake arms licenses and it is but natural, that insiders in the Collectorate Office would also be involved in a matter of this magnitude. The complicity of all officials ought to be investigated of whatsoever level, they might be at.

¶9

In the opinion of the Court, the offence in the present case is very serious and it is not imaginable that so many licenses can be issued without the involvement of higher ups in the establishment of the Collectorate. So far as the beneficiaries like the applicant are concerned, they cannot rid themselves of their liability in the matter, by saying that they secured the arms licenses through the Durga Gun House. After all under the scheme of the Arms Act, it is not the job of an Arms Dealer to secure arms licenses for those desiring to possess a fire-arm. An application has to be made to the Collectorate in the proper form, directly by the licensee. The applicant is himself to blame, if he has approached an Arms Dealer for securing an arms license. The business of the Arms Dealer is to sell fire-arms to a person holding a valid license, which he produces at the time of purchasing it. It is not the job of the Arms Dealer to secure licenses for customers whom, he wishes to sell. There is apparently a big nexus, not only between the Arms Dealer and the Arms Clerk, but in all probability higher officials of the establishment, all of which must be thoroughly probed.

¶10

Let the Principal Secretary (Home), U.P., Lucknow, ensure a thorough inquiry in the matter, sparing no level of officials at the relevant time from scrutiny. So far as these proceedings are

¶11

concerned, there is absolutely no case for interference made out.

¶12

This application fails and is dismissed.

¶13

Let this order be communicated to the Principal Secretary (Home), Government of U.P., Lucknow by the Registrar (Compliance) for stricter compliance.

¶14

Order Date :- 3.4.2023 Prashant D.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PRASHANT DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku v. State of U.P. . and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku v. State of U.P. . and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Amir @ Amir and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalandhar Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department and another

Jaishree @ Mantu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another