Writ petition filed for grant of license for NP bore rifle. The petitioner applied on 07.03.2014, pending before District Magistrate. Court directed DM to decide within three months considering Family Heirloom Policy and Manish Kumar judgment.
Direction to respond no.2 to take decision within three months considering Family Heirloom Policy.
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 PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.881 of 2016
======================================================
Faiyaz Alam, son of Late Aftab Alam, Resident of Mohalla- Fasahat Ka Maidan, Patna City, P.S.- Chowk, Town & District- Patna- 800008
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
.... .... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Manisha Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Md. Anisul Haque, AC to AAG-9
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER
2 18-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that his father was holding a firearm under valid licence. After his death, the firearm was deposited with the Arms Dealer, namely, M/S Citi Fire Arms, Patna, thereafter, the petitioner applied for grant of licence for N.P. bore rifle on 7.03.2014 but the matter is still pending before the District Magistrate, Patna.
Having regard to the aforementioned facts and circumstances, this writ application is being disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.2 to take a decision in the matter within a period of three months from the date of
Patna High Court CWJC No.881 of 2016 (2) dt.18-01-2016
2/2
receipt/production of a copy of this order in accordance with law. While doing so, he should also consider the Family Heirloom Policy of the Central Government and also the decision of this Court rendered in Manish Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 2015 (4) PLJR 212.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)
V.K. Pandey/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the District Magistrate should consider the Family Heirloom Policy and the Manish Kumar judgment while deciding the petitioner's licence application pending since 2014.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Manish Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.Referred¶20
2015 (4) PLJR 212
Faiyaz Alam
State of Bihar through Home Secretary, Govt. of Bihar
District Magistrate, Patna
District Arms Magistrate, Patna
Additional District Magistrate (Arms), Patna
Divisional Commissioner, Patna
Ravi Ranjan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
