Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
Chandreshkumar Bhupatbhai Keraliya – Petitioner
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 9598 of 2021
Decided On : 10-01-2023
Arms Licence - Renewal - Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 14 - The court discussed the rejection of the application for renewal of arms licence on the grounds of lack of appropriate training, NIL income tax returns, and no perception of threat to life. The court referred to an order passed in a similar case and held that the grounds mentioned in the impugned orders are not germane to Section 14 and possession of crop protection firearm licence cannot be a bar to possess a self-defence licensed weapon. The court directed the authorities to reconsider the request for renewal of the licence in light of the observations made by the court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the rejection of his application for an arms licence renewal, citing the need for protection due to cash transactions in his business.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of the application for renewal of arms licence on the grounds of lack of appropriate training, NIL income tax returns, and no perception of threat to life was not justified. The court directed the authorities to reconsider the request for renewal of the licence in light of the observations made by the court.
Issues: Rejection of arms licence renewal based on lack of training, NIL income tax returns, and no perception of threat to life.
Ratio Decidendi: The grounds mentioned in the impugned orders are not germane to Section 14 of the Income Tax Act, and possession of a crop protection firearm licence cannot be a bar to possess a self-defence licensed weapon.
Final Decision: The petition is partly allowed, and the respondents are directed to reconsider the request for renewal of the petitioner's arms licence in light of the court's observations.
JUDGMENT :
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Jay B. Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondents.
2. With consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
3. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 28.06.2018 and 06.06.2019 passed by the competent authorities, by which, the application of the petitioner for an arms licence, in addition to the one he already possesses for protection of crop from cattle has been rejected.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that he is engaged in the business of cement production and, therefore in course of his business, he has to undertake much cash transactions. He, therefore, needs an arms licence to protect his life which is in danger because of much amounts of cash that he carries.
5. It appears that the application for renewal of such licence has been rejected on the following four grounds:
(b) That for the years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 his Income Tax returns were NIL.
(c) That there is no perception of any threat to his life.
(d) that the petitioner already possesses a licence for crop protection. The other ground is that adverse opinion has been received from the DSP office.
6. Mr. Kaushal Modi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that as far as the objection with regard to the petitioner not having undertaken training from a recognized institute is concerned, the petitioner has a certificate of training issued by the Bhavnagar Gun House. As far as the other two grounds i.e. with regard to his IT returns and perception of threat, Mr. Modi would rely on an order passed by this Court in SCA No. 14823 of 2019 dated 3.9.2019.
7. Mr. Jay B. Trivedi, learned AGP for the respondents would submit that the order of the authorities is just and proper. The petitioner already possesses the licence for crop protection and, therefore, there is no reason why he needs another licence and he also relies on the endorsement upon the licence issued for the crop protection which indicates that it is extended upto area beyond Vinchhia.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, what needs to be appreciated is that the application of the petitioner for renewal of arms licence has been rejected on multiple grounds. Essentially, one of the four grounds which have weighed with the authorities is that he did not have a certificate of training from a recognized institute. As far as that is concerned, in light of the averment made in the petition that the petitioner possesses a certificate of the Bhavnagar Gun House, it is open for the respondent authorities to reconsider this point in considering application for renewal. The other two grounds namely; that of the petitioner having NIL IT returns for the past three years i.e. 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 and that there is no perception of threat to his life, these findings of the authority deserves reconsideration in light of the order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 14823 of 2019 in which, this Court held as under:
AI
Possession of a crop protection firearm licence cannot be a bar to possess a self-defence licensed weapon.
The court reinforced the principle that alternate remedies must be exhausted prior to seeking writ relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.
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.
The Licensing Authority has discretion to grant or refuse an arms licence based on the applicant's demonstrated need and circumstances, which must be assessed appropriately.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
