Mere involvement in a criminal case cannot be the sole ground for revoking a fire-arm licence under the Arms Act.

By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 16-7-1997 and 5-5-1998, Annexures-3 and 5 to the writ petition, respectively, passed by Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 under the provisions of Sections 17 and 18 of the Arms Act, revoking/cancelling the licence of his fire-arm.

2. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been served with a show-cause notice dated 14-11-1995 under Section 17 of the Arms Act asking him to show-cause as to why his fire-arm licence may not be cancelled, in reply thereto he has filed an objection stating therein that he was never involved in criminal case and he has not misused his gun as is alleged in the show-cause notice. The further contention of the petitioners Counsel is that only four cases have been registered against him such as Crime No. 58 of 1972, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 I. P. C. ; Crime No. 100 of 1976, under Sections 352/323 I. P. C. ; Crime No. 45 of 1992, under Sections 504/506 I. P. C. and Crime No. 58 of 1995, under Sections 364/506 I. P. C. and Section 3 (ii) (v) SC/st Act, due to enmity and mala fide intention which admittedly exists between the parties since before. Petitioner in his reply dated 3-2-1997 to the aforesaid show-cause notice has given the reasons and status of the aforementioned cases that in three cases due to compromise between the parties, the petitioner has been acquitted of the charges and in last case the accused named in the said FIR, has exonerated all the accused including the petitioner, hence the final report has been submitted by the police authorities concerned. It is on the basis of the aforesaid cases, the petitioner has been served with the aforesaid show-cause notice. A perusal of the order of revocation of the licence demonstrates that petitioner is a person connected with the crime, referred to above, and therefore, he is not a person with whom the fire-arm should be retained in public interest. The appellate authority has also taken the same view, thus this writ petition.

3. The question as to whether mere involvement in a criminal case or pendency of a criminal case can be a ground for revocation of the licence under Arms Act has been dealt with by a Division Bench of this Court reported in 1978 AWC 122, Sheo Prasad Misra v. The District Magistrate, Basti and others, wherein the Division Bench relying upon the earlier decision reported in 1972 ALJ 573, Masi Uddin v. Commissioner, Allahabad, found that mere involvement in criminal case cannot in any way affected the public security or public interest and the order cancelling or revoking the licence of firm-arm has been set aside. The present impugned orders are also suffer from the same infirmity as was pointed out by the Division Bench in the above-mentioned cases. I am in full agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench that these orders cannot be sustained and are deserve to be quashed and are hereby quashed.

4. There is yet another reason that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner has been acquitted in three cases due to compromises between the parties and in last case final report has been submitted by the police authorities concerned on the basis that the accused of that case has exonerated all the four accused persons, including the petitioner, as would be clear from the perusal of paragraphs 7 to 12 of the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner.

5. In this view of the matter, if there is nothing else, which may disentitle the petitioner for renewal of his fire-arm licence, the respondents are directed to renew the fire-arm licence of the petitioner. The writ petition deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The orders dated 6-7-1997 and 5-5-1998, Annexures-3 and 5 to the writ petition, respe