SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Pat) 2198

JYOTI SARAN, NILU AGRAWAL
Shailendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Kumar Binode Bariar.
For the Respondents: Mr. Jitendra Kumar.

Jyoti Saran, J. – Heard Mr. Kumar Binode Bariar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. Jitendra Kumar, AC to AAG XIV.

2. This appeal arises out of from a judgment and order, dated 29.07.2015, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11092 of 2011whereby the writ petition is dismissed.

3. Pleadings on record would show that the writ petition was filed by the appellant-petitioner being aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No. 2580, dated 16.07.2001, passed by the District Magistrate, Patna, whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of arms licence was rejected, inter alia, on the grounds of pending criminal cases and non-disclosure of the fact that the appellant-petitioner was already a licensee in respect of other fire arms. This order has been affirmed in appeal by the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna, when the Arms Appeal No. 369 of 2007 of the appellant-petitioner was rejected on 24.05.2011.

4. It is stated by Mr. Bariar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-petitioner, that there was no suppression by the petitioner nor their was any non-disclosure of any information on the licence because in the year 1989, the petitioner possessed no other licence. Learned counsel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top