( 1 ) THE petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved of order passed by the Commissioner of Police, City of Ahmedabad dated 9. 7. 2004, whereby the licence to possess a weapon is suspended. The petitioner had filed Appeal No. 285 of 2004 before the State Government under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959. The said appeal, though pending for long, was not heard and decided by the Appellate Authority.

( 2 ) THE petitioner had approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No. 3118 of 2005, which was not entertained by this Court but then observed as under:"in view of the fact that against the impugned order dated 9. 7. 2004, the petitioner has already availed the statutory alternative remedy by way of appeal, the present petition challenging the said order is not entertained. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate authority is directed to decide and dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 9. 7. 2004 of the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the writ of this order. "

( 3 ) THE appellate authority decided the appeal by order dated 11. 4. 2005 and dismissed the same upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Police dated 13. 1. 2004 (sic- 9. 7. 2004 ).

( 4 ) THE facts of the case are that the petitioner, a citizen and national of India, residing in the city of Ahmedabad, having his offence at Hanjar Cinema Building, was possessing an arm licence bearing No. 304. The petitioner was possessing a weblo and Scott Revolver No. 77412 of 0. 32 bore. The licence was valid upto 9. 12. 2003. The petitioner applied for renewal of the licence on 17. 11. 2003 with payment of requisite fees. As the petitioner did not hear anything from the authorities, he sent a reminder on 16. 3. 2004. On petitioner s making a reminder, he received a show cause notice, issued by the office of the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City dated 17. 3. 2004, by which the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why his licence should not be cancelled in light of the fact that an offence is registered against the petitioner at Saherkotda Police Station being II- C. R. No. 3314 of 2004 under Sections 7a (i), 7 (1) (b) and 14 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and under Sections 114 and 292 of the Indian Penal Code. It was also mentioned in the show cause notice that the petitioner was arrested on 10. 12. 2003 and, therefore, it is not deemed proper to continue the arm licence under subsection (3) of Section 17 of the Arms Act. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice on the same day, i. e. 17. 3. 2004. The petitioner submitted in the reply that a false case was registered against the petitioner which is pending in the Court; and the Court has not held him guilty for the said offence; that the criminal case was filed against the petitioner for unknown reasons and under pressure of somebody; that the petitioner is going to be acquitted when the case is going to be tried; that he is required to handle Government money which he has to deposit off and on in the treasury; that for his own self defence also, weapon is required; that it will be for the safety of the Government money and of his own that the licence is required to be continued.

( 5 ) THE learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that, pursuant to show cause notice dated 17. 3. 2004, the petitioner had deposited the weapon with Saherkotda Police Station, Ahmedabad City. The learned advocate submitted that, without taking into consideration the reply of the petitioner, the authority-the Commissioner of Police, City of Ahmedabad passed an order suspending the licence of the petitioner. The only ground on which the order is based is, the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case . The authority did not take into consideration the nature of the criminal case filed against the petitioner. The learned advocate submitted t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document