The absence of an actual threat perception cannot be the sole ground for denying an arms license, and licensing authorities must consider the applicant's profession and circumstances as per the Arms Rules.

JUDGMENT :

Mohit Kumar Shah, J.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.02.2019, passed by the District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah in Case No. 17 of 2018, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the petitioner for grant of arms license has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has failed to produce any evidence regarding him having threat to his life. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dated 20.12.2019, passed by the learned Court of Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur in Arms Appeal Case No. 102 of 2019, whereby and whereunder the appeal has been dismissed on same and similar grounds.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner had filed an application for grant of arms license in the year 2017, whereafter the police had conducted verification and a report dated 07.02.2018 was submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Bettiah, West Champaran, wherein recommendation was made for issuance of arms license in favour of the petitioner. The District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah had then passed the impugned order dated 15.02.2019, whereby and whereunder the application of the petitioner for grant of arms license has been rejected. The petitioner had then filed an appeal bearing Arms Appeal No. 102 of 2019, which has also stood dismissed by an order dated 20.12.2019, passed by the learned Court of Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a farmer and his place of residence is near the Indo-Nepal Border, hence he is having imminent risk from the Naxal elements, hence it is imperative that he be granted arms license. It is further submitted that the only ground on which the impugned orders dated 15.02.2019 and 20.12.2019 have been passed against the petitioner, is absence of threat perception qua the petitioner herein, which according to the petitioner, cannot be a ground for rejection of the case of the petitioner for grant of arms license. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a judgment dated 14.07.2022 passed by this Court in CWJC No. 10784 of 2021 (Vijay Kumar Singh vs. The State of Bihar & Others) and the one dated 27.11.2024, passed by this Court in the case of Ranjan Kumar Mandal Vs. The State of Bihar & Others (CWJC No. 4117 of 2020).

4. At this juncture, it would be relevant to reproduce paragraphs no. 4 to 6 of the aforesaid judgment rendered in the case of Vijay Kumar Singh (supra) herein below:-

“4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to a judgment reported in 2008(1) PLJR 151 (Amrendra Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) to submit that it is not necessary that threat perception should be present, so as to warrant grant of arms license to the applicant.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to a judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court, reported in 2015(4) PLJR 212 (Manish Kumar & Others vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), to submit that in absence of any evidence regarding threat perception, grant of arms license cannot be refused. In this connection, it would be apt to reproduce paragraph no. 29 of the said judgment hereinbelow:-

“29. This Court is in agreement with the aforesaid decisions as a conjoint reading of Sections 13 and 14 of the Act does not disclose anywhere that the absence of any evidence regarding threat can form a condition for refusal to grant arms licence. In my considered opinion, the licensing authority cannot apply its discretion in a m