Petitioner challenged refusal of arms license renewal due to pendency of criminal case. Court ordered filing of fresh application within two months.
Petitioner permitted to file fresh application; case disposed leaving liberty to submit application, to be finalized at the earliest or within two months.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941
WP(C).No.2735 of 2019
PETITIONER:
E.K.UNNIKAMMED ALIAS KUNHU, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. MOYINKUTTY (LATE), PUTHANPURACKAL HOUSE, P.O., EDAVANNA, PIN-676541, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SAJI KURIACHAN SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM-676 505.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.2735 of 2019
-2-
JUDGMENT
Petitioner was a holder of a gun bearing
License No.1182/ERD. In the year 2004, petitioner has submitted an application seeking renewal of the license which was declined for the reason that petitioner was an accused in a crime. However, in the criminal case pending against the petitioner, Petitioner was acquitted as per Ext.P3 judgment by the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II (Forest Offences), Manjeri in C.C.No.138 of 2010. The contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the application was not renewed on the ground of pendency of the crime in the criminal case, the respondents a re duty bound to consider the application, in accordance with law, in view of the acquittal. However, learned Government Pleader, after instructions, submitted that since the subject application is of the year 2004, no records
could be traced out in order to consider the said application.
In order to have a quietus to the issue, I think it is only appropriate that the petitioner is
WP(C).No.2735 of 2019
-3-
permitted to file a fresh application showing all those reasons. I am also informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Arm is already surrendered and is in the custody of the respondents. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to submit any fresh application before the first respondent, and if any application is submitted it shall be finalised, at the earliest possible and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of the application after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, taking into account the provisions of the Arms Act and Rules.
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
JUDGE
vv/01.07.2019
WP(C).No.2735 of 2019
-4-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 29.11.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE RENEWAL OF HIS ARMS LICENSE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.2.2006 OF THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.12.2017 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II (FOREST OFFENCES) MANJERI.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION DATED 12.3.2018.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.9.2018 OF THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8.11.2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 32521/18.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DCMPM/10191/2018-E1(1) DATED 15.12.2018 OF THE IST RESPONDENT.
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
E.K.UNNIKAMMED ALIAS KUNHU
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MALAPPURAM
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT
SHAJI P.CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
