Deepak Singh Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010243142023

¶3

undefined

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/6236/2023

¶6

DEEPAK SINGH S/O- LATE RAM NAGINA SINGH, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BUILDWORTH BUILDING, G.S ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781005

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REP. BY ITS SECRETARY , MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110001.

¶9

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

¶10

3:THE SECOND IN COMMAND IS-1 DIVISION/ARMS SECTION TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

¶11

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

¶12

MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STADIUM

¶13

NEW DELHI-110001.

¶14

4:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR

¶15

Page No.# 2/5

¶16

GUWAHATI-6

¶17

5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI (ADMINISTRATIVE BRANCH) PIN-781036 ASSAM 6:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI--36 ASSAM 7:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI--36 ASSA

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : R SARMAH, MR. R B PHOOKAN,MR K J HAZARIKA,MS M KAKOTY

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. B DEKA (r-1 & 3),GA, ASSAM

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

06.01.2025

¶23

Heard Mr. R.B. Phookan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. B. Deka, learned counsel appears for the respondent nos.1 and 3, while Mr. S.S. Roy, learned counsel appears for the respondent nos.4, 5, 6 & 7.

¶24

The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, wherein the petitioner’s Arms Licence No.532(K) Ghy P.S. (UIN: 040991000373532017) has been cancelled and the petitioner has been asked to deposit the .38 Bore Revolver No.: 28644 at the Dispur Police Station and to deposit the Arms

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

Licence to the office of the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati for cancellation and entry of the same in their records.

¶27

The petitioner’s counsel submits that the said revolver initially belonged to the petitioner’s father since the year 1974 and after the death of his father in the year 2004, the petitioner was issued an Arms Licence for the same on 25.04.2017, by the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati.

¶28

On 18.01.2018, the petitioner submitted a letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) requesting for grant of an All India Licence for the said revolver. However, vide letter dated 25.03.2019 issued by the respondent no.3 to the Secretary, Home(C) Department seeking clarification regarding issuance of an All India Licence to the petitioner for a .38 Bore Revolver, the Secretary, Home(C) Department directed the petitioner to send the original licence in his possession for examination to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. The respondent no.3 thereafter wrote a letter to the Secretary, Home(C) Department, Government of Assam, stating that as per the Schedule-I of the Arms Rules, 2016, .38 Bore Revolver fell in the category of restricted arms, for which the Ministry of Home Affairs was the Licencing Authority. It was thereafter requested that necessary clarification should be made and the petitioner may be directed to send the original licence in his possession for examination to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Pursuant to the letter dated 25.03.2019 issued by the respondent no.3, the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home(C) Department wrote a letter dated 14.10.2019 to the District Magistrate, Kamrup(M) District, Guwahati stating that the petitioner’s Arms Licence No.532(K) Ghy P.S. may be cancelled as it was issued beyond his jurisdiction. Consequent to the said letter dated

¶29

Page No.# 4/5

¶30

14.10.2019, the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 was issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, which is reproduced hereinbelow, as follows :

¶31

“Order

¶32

In pursuance to the directions of the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Home (C) Department, Dispur, Ghy-06 vide the Govt. letter no.: HMM17/2017/179, Dated: 14/10/2019, the Arms licence No- 532 (K) Ghy P.S. (UIN: 040991000373532017) is hereby cancelled. The applicant is hereby asked to deposit the one .38 PB Revolver No.: 28644, endorsed in the concerned Arms Licence, at the Dispur Police Station and deposit the Arms Licence to this office immediately for its cancellation and entry of the same in our records.

¶33

The Officer- In- Charge, Dispur P.S. is hereby asked to receive the said weapon from the applicant against proper receipt.

¶34

Smti. Bhaswati Duara, Technical Director, National Informatics Centre, Assam State Centre, Dispur, Guwahati-06, is hereby requested to do the needful to cancel the above mentioned Unique Identification Number generated for the said Arms Licence.

¶35

This has the approval of the District Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in file No. KAA. 11/2017.”

¶36

As can be seen from the above communications made, the respondent nos.2, 4, 5 & 6 have not placed the petitioner’s case for grant of an All India Licence with regard to his .38 Revolver, before the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the competent authority to take a decision with regard to whether an Arms Licence should be issued under Schedule-I of the Arms Rules, 2016. Though, the District Magistrate, Kamrup(M) did not have the competence to issue an Arms Licence under Schedule-I of the Arms Rules, 2016, the same having already been issued by the District Magistrate, the issue was to be finally decided by the Ministry of Home Affairs. It was the requirement of the State respondents to have submitted a clarification to the Ministry of Home Affairs,

¶37

Page No.# 5/5

¶38

who would take a final decision with regard to whether the Arms Licence should be issued to the petitioner. However, the same appears not to have been done.

¶39

In view of the reasons stated above, the State respondents are directed to make a clarification with regard to the Arms Licence applied for by the petitioner and allow the petitioner to submit an application for grant of an Arms Licence before the Ministry of Home Affairs, with regard to the inherited .38 Bore Revolver. It is also made clear that the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup(M) should not come in the way of Ministry of Home Affairs, while taking a decision on the petitioner’s application for grant of an Arms Licence for his .38 Bore Revolver. Keeping in view the provision of Rule 47 of the Arms Rules, 2016, the petitioner’s .38 Bore Revolver may be sent to the safe custody of a dealer holding licence under Form-VIII, on an application to be made by the petitioner before the concerned O.C. of the Dispur Police Station, till a final decision is taken by the respondent nos.1 & 3, with regard to the petitioner’s application for grant of an Arms Licence. The petitioner is accordingly given the liberty to apply for a fresh Arms Licence for his .38 Bore Revolver before the competent authority within a period of 4 (four) weeks from today.

¶40

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

Comparing Assistant

Deepak Singh v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Singh v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

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

M/S Vivek Transport Agency Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Jyotish Das Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Hemanta Bora Vs Oil India Ltd. and 4 Ors.

M/S S.S Enterprise Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Chitralekha Kalita Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

M/S. Saikhowa Sadiya Min Samabai Samiti Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.