Dismissed¶¶10

Shivam Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2025WRIC/307/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

arms licence; application rejected 05.10.2024; form unfilled in various columns; WRIT - C No. 307 of 2025; Shivam Awasthi; State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Home; Pankaj Bhatia judge; dismissed 27.1.2025; original record produced by Standing Counsel; Annexure no.4; Manish Kumar and Others vs The State of Bihar (2015) 08 PAT CK 0107; Sundram Tiwari @ Sundram Kumar Vs The State of Bihar; Patna High Court; eminent danger to life; fresh licence; neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:5130; Lucknow Bench; Court No. 7; digitally signed Anupam Singh Patel

What did the court decide?

None; the Court stated that the petitioner may apply for fresh licence, if so advised. ¶¶10

Shivam Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the Court stated that the petitioner may apply for fresh licence, if so advised.

¶¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition challenging the 05.10.2024 rejection of the petitioner's arms licence application — rejected on the stated ground that the application filed was unfilled in various columns, while counsel asserted the application on record as Annexure no.4 had all columns filled — should be allowed. +1 more

¶¶6

Court's answer

On perusal of the original record produced by the Learned Standing Counsel — containing the application signed by the petitioner yet blank in the columns indicated in the impugned order — this Court found no reason to disbelieve the record and accordingly dismissed the petition.

¶¶10

Ratio / Principle

Because in the present case the application was rejected on account of the form being unfulfilled, the judgments relied upon by counsel (which concerned the pleaded eminent danger to life) could not be of benefit to the petitioner.

¶¶11

Key takeaways

The petitioner may apply for a fresh licence, if so advised.obiter¶¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:5130 — Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 7), WRIT - C No. 307 of 2025, decided 27.1.2025 by Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia, J.: petition of Shivam Awasthi DISMISSED. He had challenged the order dated 05.10.2024 rejecting his application for grant of arms licence, made mainly on the ground that the application filed was unfilled in various columns; his counsel contended the application on record (Annexure no.4) had all columns filled and relied on Patna High Court rulings (Manish Kumar and Others vs. The State of Bihar, (2015) 08 PAT CK 0107; Sundram Tiwari @ Sundram Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & others) holding there is no requirement to plead eminent danger to life. The Learned Standing Counsel produced the original record showing the signed application blank in the indicated columns; the Court had no reason to disbelieve it, observed that the relied-upon judgements could not benefit the petitioner since the rejection flowed from the unfulfilled form, and dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner may apply for a fresh licence if so advised.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5130

¶2

Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 307 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shivam Awasthi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Kumar Dwivedi,Prem Shankar

¶3

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.

¶6

The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.10.2024, whereby the application for grant of arms licence was rejected mainly on the ground that application filed was unfilled in various columns.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that his application is on record as Annexure no.4, wherein all the columns were filled.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgement of the Patna High Court passed in the case of Manish Kumar and Others vs. The State of Bihar, (2015) 08 PAT CK 0107 , wherein the court held that there is no requirement to plead in the application that there was eminent danger to the life, which is the ground of refusal, which is bad in law. He also places reliance on the judgement in the case of Sundram Tiwari @ Sundram Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & others, wherein similar view as taken.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has produced the original record, which contains application signed by the petitioner and which is blank in the columns as indicated in the impugned order.

¶10

On perusal of the original record, this Court is no reason to disbelieve the same. As such the petition is dismissed .

¶11

In the present case, application has been rejected on account of the form being unfulfilled, thus the judgements cannot in the benefit of the petitioner.

¶12

The petitioner may apply for fresh licence, if so advised.

¶13

Order Date :- 27.1.2025/Anupam S/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shivam Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Revenue Secy. Lko. and 9 Others

Furqan Maqsood Kidwai Vs Addl. Principal Judge-Ii, Family Court, Barabanki and Another

Jyoti Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Shivam Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Thru. Divisional Manager Vs Commissioner and Secy. Board of Revenue Lko and Others

Hanuman Prasad Vs Pakhandi