Disposed

Mohd Masihuddin Khan, v. Sri Rajiv Trivedi (Ips)

Telangana HC11 Jul 2018CC/1722/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt case, the court held that a delay of five months by the respondents in complying with the order dated 21.09.2016 (which directed reconsideration of an arms license application) does not warrant punishment. The court closed the case, granting the petitioner liberty to assail the rejection order of 09.09.2017 in appropriate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed. Liberty granted to petitioner to assail the order passed by respondents in appropriate proceedings.

Mohd Masihuddin Khan, Vs Sri Rajiv Trivedi (Ips) — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶2

CC.No.1722 of 2017

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dt.21.09.2016 passed in WP.No.24260 of 2013.

¶5

2. The petitioner herein had applied for arms license which had been rejected vide G.O.Rt.No.1537 Home (Arms) Department dt.11.07.2013, by the respondents. This was challenged in WP.No.24260 of 2013 contending that subsequent thereto there was also acquittal of petitioner by the XV Additional Judge-cum-XIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad on 04.12.2014 in C.C.No.303 of 2014, arising out of Crime No.226 of 2009.

¶6

3. In view of the said event which has occurred after the passing of the G.O., the WP.No.24260 of 2013 was allowed, the said G.O. was set aside, and the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner’s application for restoration of his arms license and for its further renewal keeping in mind this order passed by the Criminal Court also within a period of six (06) weeks.

¶7

4. Alleging that this order is not complied with though considerable time has elapsed, the petitioner filed the present Contempt Case in August, 2017.

¶8

5. After the present Contempt Case was filed, the respondents passed orders on 09.09.2017, taking into account the acquittal of petitioner in Crime No.226 of 2009 as well as rejecting grant of arms

¶9

MSR,J cc_1722_2017

¶10

::2::

¶11

license to him on the ground that he may misuse the weapon against rivals.

¶12

6. Counter-affidavit has been filed by respondents tendering unconditional apology for the delay in complying with the order and explaining the reasons for the delay.

¶13

7. Though there appears to be about five (05) months’ delay in complying with this Court’s order by respondents, after receiving the report from the Commissioner of Police in considering the petitioner’s case for grant of renewal of arms license, this Court does not deem it necessary to proceed further in the Contempt Case and punish the respondents for Contempt of Court.

¶14

8. Though the counsel for petitioner sought to contend that even the order dt.09.09.2017 is passed mechanically without application of mind, I do not think it is appropriate to go into the said contention in this Contempt Case.

¶15

9. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to assail the order dt.09.09.2017 passed by the respondents in appropriate proceedings. No order as to costs.

¶16

10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Contempt Case, shall stand closed.

¶17

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶18

Date: 11.07.2018 Ndr/*

Mohd Masihuddin Khan, v. Sri Rajiv Trivedi (Ips)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Masihuddin Khan, v. Sri Rajiv Trivedi (Ips)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Shravya Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

S. Bathi Reddy (died) Vs L. Bathi Reddy (died)

Polam Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

M/s. Himjal Beverages Private Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Madduri Thirupathi Reddy Vs State of Telangana

Sri M. Chandrasekhar Rao Vs State of Telangana