IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Premier Gun House - Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 3521 of 2021 & CM APPLs.10664, 38417, 38428 of 2021, 50490 of 2022, .P.(C) 10930 of 2022& CM APPL.44354 of 2022
Decided On : 18-01-2023
Foreign Trade (Development and Registration) Act, 1992 - Section 15, (1)(b) - Licenses to import arms - Release of consignment - Seeking reliefs in respect of its licenses to import arms as also for release of consignment and other reliefs – Held, Customs authorities had cleared consignment, however, same could not be released due to inspection not being carried out by police authority - Considering fact that if there is a delay in inspection, as per Rule 88(6), additional charge or demurrage incurred by Petitioner would be attributable to licensing authority, Petitioner is permitted to seek refund of demurrage charges in accordance with law - Petitions disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. These are two writ petitions filed by the Petitioner- Premier Gun House, Delhi seeking reliefs in respect of its licenses to import arms as also for release of consignment and other reliefs.
3. The Petitioner is a registered entity engaged in import and trading of arms and ammunition. On 2nd August, 2019 it applied to the DGFT seeking a composite license for import and trading of restricted items and had paid the requisite fee for the same. An import license was granted in favour of the Petitioner on 25th September, 2020 which was valid for a period of 18th months i.e., 25th September, 2020 till 24th March, 2022.
4. The import license which was granted was subject to an ‘actual user condition’ meaning that the Petitioner could import but not trade in the said arms and ammunition. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner had in November, 2020 imported certain weapons which were cleared and released by the customs authority after inspection. However, thereafter the impugned show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner on 25th February, 2021 calling upon the Petitioner to explain as to how it had sold the arms which were imported subject to ‘actual user condition’. The said show cause notice reads as under:
While an Import Licence No. 0519240593 dated 25.9.2020 was Issued for import of Arms & Ammunition with actual user condition.
And whereas it has been replaced that you have sold arms imported against the above said Import License in the market, which is violation of the Actual User condition of the import license.
Accordingly, under the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, as amended, you are hereby called upon to show cause to the undersigned as to why action should not be taken for violating the actual user condition imposed on the licence.
Reply to this notice should reach the undersigned within 10 days hereof; if the firm wants to be heard in person, they may appear before the undersigned within 15 days of receipt of this SCN, with prior appointment between 2 to 5 pm on any working day, failing which it would be deemed that they have no defence to make in writing or orally in person or through an authorized person, and the matter would be decided ex-parte on merits.
This is issued without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against you under any other law as applicable.”
5. The Petitioner had on 26th February, 2021 again imported certain arms and ammunition. The Petitioner approached the custom authorities for clearance and release of the said consignment. However, the Petitioner learnt that DGFT had advised the custom authorities to not to clear any consignment of the Petitioner against import license No.015924-593 dated 25th September, 2020 till further orders. The show cause notice was replied to by the Petitioner vide a detailed reply on 08th March, 2021.
6. The Petitioner, thereafter, on 11th March, 2021 received an email from the DGFT asking it to surrender the import license which was issued to it which led to the filing of the present petition. The prayer in this petition are as under:
AND
B. Issue an appropriate Writ, Order, Directions especially in the nature of Mandamus thereby quashing the email dated 11.03.2021 received by the petitioner from DGFT and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom;
AND
C. Issue an appropriate Writ, Order, Directions especially in the nature of Mandamus, thereby, directing DGFT, Respondent No. 2 to dispense with the Actua
SupremeToday
The judgment establishes the requirement of obtaining licences under the FTDR Act from the DDP and licence in `Form X' under the Arms Act from the DGFT for the import of arms and parts thereof.
The court held that components such as Frames and Slides can be imported with additional furniture parts as long as the manufacturer holds a valid license, and the denial of release based on addition....
Renewal of an arms licence can be denied based on public safety concerns and the applicant's criminal conviction, emphasizing the need for timely applications.
Point of law: Foreign trade license - core issue is the insertion of actual user condition in the two licences - whether such insertion is legally permissible or without entering into this aspect, wh....
Licensing authorities must provide a hearing before refusing licence renewal, aligning with principles of natural justice and constitutional guarantees.
Appellate authority lacks power to suspend an arms licence pending inquiry but may remand for further investigation if implicit in jurisdiction.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.