Harbhajan Singh Vs State of Haryana and Another

Learned counsel appearing on b e half of the petitioner submits that despite petitioner’s applying for arms license in 2021 in “ family heirloom cat e gory” no decision has yet bee n taken by the authorities. The file number of petitioner’s application is 163/ L C dated May 18, 2021.

¶14

I s sue notice to the respondents.

¶15

M r. Sharad Aggarwal, DAG, Ha r yana accepts notice on behalf of all the re s pondents and hands over doc u ments in Court today. Such documents ar e retained with the record.

¶16

F r om the said documents, it a p pears that vide order dated December 2 7 , 2021 a total of 615 files per t aining to grant of new arms licenses we r e rejected by the District M agistrate-respondent No.2. However, no reasons were recorded in writi n g or no speaking orders were passed on t h ose files. Therefore, show-ca u se-notice was issued to the person conc e rned-LPA of the branch reg a rding lapse on his part for bringing to t h e attention of respondent No. 2 that speaking order had not

¶17

VANDANA 2025.03.28 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

CWP-2960-2025

¶20

been passed on those files. Furthermore, t he applicants had not been informed abo u t the status of their files. 5. M r. Aggarwal submits that in t h e event the petitioner applies for furnishin g of such speaking order under S ection 14(3) of the Arms Act, 1959 (for sho r t ‘the 1959 Act’), the same sha l l be forwarded to him.

¶21

This Court has heard the learne d counsel for the parties and perused the m aterial on record.

¶22

S e ction 14(3) of 1959 Act is repr o duced hereunder:-

¶23

“14. Refusal of licences XX X XXX XXX ( 3) Where the licensing authorit y refuses to grant a licence to a n y person it shall record in w riting the reasons for such r e fusal and furnish to that perso n on demand a brief statement o f the same unless in any case t h e licensing authority is of the o p inion that it will not be in the p ublic interest to furnish such s t atement.”

¶24

A s per Section 14(3) of the 1 959 Act when a licensing authority ref u ses to grant the license to any p e rson it shall record in writing reasons for s u ch “ refusal” .

¶25

A dmittedly, no reasons were r e corded in writing for such “ refusal” an d no speaking order was passed r ecording the reasons for such “ refusal ” to g rant of arms license to the petitioner in ‘ family heirloom category ’.

¶26

To the mind of this Court, re s pondent No.2 has failed to comply with mandatory statutory require m ent. Therefore, the order of “refusal ” passed on petitioner’s file is set asi d e. Respondent No.2 will take a fresh deci s ion on file No.163/LC dated May 18, 2021 and pass a reasoned ord e r within 3 months from the dat e of this order. In the event the authorities a r e inclined to decide against t h e interest of the petitioner,