MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.:–The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.10.2018 passed by the learned Commissioner, Saran Division, Saran at Chapra in Arms Appeal No. 244 of 2014, whereby and whereunder the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected as also the order dated 23.07.2015 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in Arms Case No. 18 of 2015, whereby and whereunder the application of the petitioner for grant of arms license have been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case according to the petitioner are that he had applied for arms license in the year 2011, however, his application was rejected by an order dated 23.07.2015 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra merely on the ground that firstly the petitioner did not have any threat perception inasmuch as there was no specific report regarding any incident of threat of life and property qua the petitioner in the concerned police station and secondly, the petitioner appears to be seeking arms license to maintain his status. The petitioner had then challenged the said order dated 23.07.2015 before the Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra by filing an appeal bearing Arms Appeal No. 244 of 2014, however, the same was also dismissed by an order dated 24.10.2018, on same and similar grounds.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the petitioner’s challenge to the aforesaid orders dated 23.07.2015 and 24.10.2018, has contended that merely nonexistence of any threat perception would not dis-entitle an applicant from grant of arms license and in this regard he has referred to a judgment reported in 2015(4) PLJR 212, rendered in the case of Manish Kumar & others Vs. The State of Bihar & others, paragraph nos. 20 and 22 whereof are reproduced herein below:—

“20. Similarly, Section 14 of the Act lays down that, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 13, the licensing authority may refuse to grant the arms license, on certain grounds. Section 14 of the Act nowhere discloses that lack of any evidence regarding threat perception upon the applicant may also form a ground for refusal of the arms licence.

22. Indeed, the subjective satisfaction of the licensing authority on the reasons set forth in Section 13 or 14 of the Act would form a condition precedent for grant of licence or refusal to grant licence but the so-called evidence regarding threat perception does not find specific place either in Section 13 or 14 of the Act. So far Section 14(1)(b)(i)(3) of the Act is concerned, that is only applicable in case the applicant is found to be unfit on any reason provided under the statute but socalled threat perception, not being any ground either in Section 13 or Section 14, one would wonder as to how it can form a ground for refusal of licence. Similarly, even the directive of the Central Government or any authority for such consideration would also not be meaningful in the absence of any statutory provision in that regard. The letter dated 31.03.2010 issued by the Ministry of Home, Central Government, has been considered by a Single Bench of this Court while considering the issue of threat perception for refusal of licence in C.W.J.C. No. 2503 of 2013 (Ram Bachan Rai Vs. The State of Bihar and others). While disposing of the aforesaid writ application vide order dated 25.08.2014 the learned Single Judge has opined as under:—

“Even the circular relied upon by the District Magistrate issued by the Government of India does not create any bar. Paragraph ii(a) of the circular in fact merely provides that applications from persons who have perceived threats may be considered. Such requirement in no manner would exclude such persons who do not face any such treat and for the simple reason that any such condition being imposed in a circular issued by the department, would be contrary to the statutory provisions.”

4. Thus the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it is a well settled law that an application for