The rejection of an arms license application must be based on grounds that have a nexus to the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, particularly Sec.14, and cannot be based on non-germane grounds such as the applicant's income or lack of sufficient income.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.Kaushal Modi, learned counsel appearing for Mr.Ashish Dagli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Rohan Shah, learned AGP, for the Staterespondent.

2. Challenge in this petition is to the order of the District Magistrate dated 21.04.2012 passed by the District Magistrate, Surendranagar, confirmed in appeal by the order dated 16.09.2014 by which the petitioners application for procuring arm license has been rejected.

3. Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner is a resident of Sayla. He made an application for procuring a license for N.P.Bore Revolver/Pistol. That application was rejected by the District Magistrate, Surendranagar on 21.02.2012 and an appeal preferred to the authorities and the Home Department also stood rejected.

3.1 It is the case of the petitioner that the rejection of the application is not on the grounds germane to the cause. It is his case that the monthly turn over of the petitioner’s business which is of supplying building materials has a monthly turn over of Rs.50,00,000/-(Rs.50 lakhs only). He needs to travel from one place to another for business with cash. The ground for rejection of he paying nominal income tax and that due to the banking sector providing number of facilities for transferring funds is not a ground which has any reasonable nexus with the application made.

4. Mr.Modi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would rely on an order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court rendered in Special Civil Application No. 1521 of 2015. He would submit that reading the order would indicate that the Court has held that the Appellate Authority cannot refuse license on non germane grounds which are in fact not available to the authorities. The aspect of the applier for the license of income and that he does not venture to take any risk in the business is not a ground available under Sec.14 of the Arms Act, 1959. Reliance is also placed on an order dated 05.01.2016 passed in Special Civil Application No.14369 of 2015 and an order dated 07.07.2022 passed in Special Civil Application No. 9318 of 2021.

5. Mr.Rohan Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader, would support the orders passed by the authorities below and submit that subjective satisfaction arrived at by the authorities cannot be faulted and this Court should not interfere with the orders when the cause advanced by them is just and proper. He would submit that the petitioner has failed to show any direct or indirect threat to his life and as indicated in the affidavit-in-reply, if the recent development of demonitization and the economic policy of the State Government is to boost non cash transactions justifies the passing of the order. He would also rely on an order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 4780 of 2022, wherein, the Court affirmed the orders of the authority below holding that it is a situation best assessed by the authorities based on the material and such assessment cannot be substituted by this Court.

6. Having perused the orders passed by the authorities below, reading of the order of the Magistrate indicates that primarily the influence for rejecting the application is on account of the fact that the authority has opined that since there is large scale availability of bank transactions through ATM, Demand Drafts and transactions can be done through the medium, there is no reason why the petitioner would need an arm license in order to protect himself. The Appellate Authority too has affirmed the order and also opined that looking to the Income Tax Returns filed by the appellant-original petitioner indicates that he would not need a license to carry an arm. Perusal of the orders of this Court in the case of Ghanshyambhai Zaverbhai Sonani vs. State of Gujarat & Ors., rendered in SCA No. 1521 of 2019, and in the case of Rameshbhai Jethabhai Malakiya vs. State of Gujarat., rendered in SCA No. 14369 of 2015, indicate that the provisions of Sec.14 have been set out and the Court has opi