The High Court set aside the Divisions Commissioner's order rejecting an arms license application. Remanded the matter for fresh decision with adequate opportunity for both parties under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959.
Order dated 27.1.2005 set aside; matter remitted to Divisional Commissioner for fresh decision with adequate opportunity.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 588 OF 2005
Dattatray Raghunath Waghmare ........ .......... ... Petitonoer. V/s The State of Maharashtra.... ..... Respondent. Office Notes, Office ) Court's or Judge's Orders Memoranda of Coram, appearances, ) Court's orders or directions and ) Registrar's orders. )
Mr.Niranjan Mundargi, Adv. For the petitioner.
Mr.A.M. Shringarpure, APP for the State.
CORAM:V.G. PALSHIKAR
AND R.C. CHAVAN, JJ. 15.7.2005.
PC:
By this petition the petitioner has questioned the order passed by the Appropriate Authority i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune under the provisions of section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959. By this impugn;ed order the learned Commissioner has affirmed the order passed by the police authority rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of/renewal of licence to hold arms. The main contention of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the
entire order is based on incorrect facts resulting in incorrect application of law and he desires to bring correct facts before the Appropriate Authority. In our opinion, no injury would be caused to the respondentState if such prayer is granted. Hence order dated 27.1.2005 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune for decision under section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959 in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity to both the sides to put up its case. Petition accordingly stands disposed of.
15/7/2005
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order of the Appropriate Authority rejecting the license application should be set aside due to incorrect facts and lack of adequate opportunity.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dattatray Raghunath Waghmare
The State of Maharashtra
V.G. Palshikar
R.C. Chavan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
