Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 30.5.2017, passed by the District Magistrate, Gopalganj, in New Arms Case No. 18 of 2017, whereby and whereunder the application of the petitioner for grant of arms license has been rejected. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 25.2.2020, passed by the learned Court of Divisional Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra, in Arms Appeal Case No. 98 of 2019, whereby and whereunder the appeal, filed by the petitioner, has been dismissed on the ground that the petitioner is not having any threat perception.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a railway contractor, hence, needs an arms license to possess arms for the safety of his life and security of his property as also in order to safely enable him to carry out his day to day activities as a contractor, thus, the petitioner had applied for grant of arms license on 23.12.2015, in the prescribed format, before the District Magistrate, Gopalganj, whereafter the application of the petitioner was sent to the Officer-in-Charge, Jadopur, for enquiry, who had recommended the case of the petitioner for grant of arms license, vide letter dated 4.11.2016, nonetheless, the District Magistrate, Gopalganj, has rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of arms license on the ground that no reason has been shown by the petitioner so as to warrant grant of arms license to him.

3. The petitioner had then challenged the aforesaid order dated 30.5.2017, by filing an appeal bearing Arms Appeal Case No. 98 of 2019, before the learned Court of Divisional Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra, however, the same has also stood dismissed, by an order dated 25.2.2020, on the ground that the police report does not show that the petitioner is having any threat perception.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a well-settled law that absence of threat perception cannot be a ground for denial of arms license and in this connection, reference has been made to the judgment, rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Bihar & Ors. vs. Deepak Kumar, reported in 2019(1) PLJR 664, relevant paragraph whereof is reproduced hereinbelow:—

“The order of the District Magistrate, as communicated, does not indicate the existence of any valid reason, but, at the same time, the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner indicates that there was no mention of any specific security threat or danger to the appellant in the police report. Such a ground, in our opinion, would be contrary to the intent of grant of license inasmuch as it is not necessary that a person should have an actual threat or imminent threat perception, but it would suffice if the applicant is able to persuade the authority to take into consideration the nature of his trade, profession and calling for the purpose of grant of license which situation has now been taken care of under sub-rule(3) (a) of Rule 12 of the 2016 Rules. In this view of the matter, the question of grant or refusal of license will have to be revisited by the licensing authority where the licensing authority will have the power to make an assessment as per the aforesaid Rules, keeping in view the police report or such other factors which may be necessary for the said purpose.”

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied on a judgment dated 4.10.2024, rendered by this Court in the case of Shakeel Ahmad vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (CWJC No. 17068 of 2023), paragraph No.3 whereof is reproduced herein below:—

“3. The petitioner had then challenged the aforesaid order dated 28.10.2018, by filing an appeal, bearing Appeal Case No.135 of 2022, before the Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, however, the same has also stood dismissed by the impugned order dated 20.02.2023 on the ground that the District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah has passed a reasone