JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—This writ petition is directed against order dated 10.8.2009 passed by District Magistrate, Allahabad cancelling fire-arm licence of petitioner on the ground that he has not given correct information in his application inasmuch as at Item Nos. 5 and 6 of the application, i.e., information relating to current and permanent address, the petitioner has disclosed same address in both columns, namely, 224/18 C Beniganj, Post G.T.B. Nagar, P.S. Kareli, Allahabad whereas his permanent address is Village Makdoompur (Doksaha), P.S. and District Kaushambi and, therefore, he is guilty of contravening Rule 51 which is punishable under Section 30 of Arms Act for giving wrong information and as such his application is liable to be rejected.

2. The said order has been confirmed in appeal by Commissioner vide order dated 15.2.2011.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is presently residing at 224/18 C Beniganj, Post G.T.B. Nagar, P.S. Kareli, Allahabad and has been issued a driving licence, ration card as well as domicile certificate and, therefore, address given by him satisfies the requirement of “permanent address” and his application ought not have been rejected for this reason.

4. Learned Standing Counsel on the contrary submitted that petitioner’s forefathers belong to Village Makdoompur (Doksaha), P.S. and District Kaushambi and since the petitioner has not broken relations with the place of his forefathers, his permanent address would be that of his forefathers and since this was not disclosed by him, he was guilty of non-disclosure of correct information/or concealment of correct information hence violated Rule l51 and his application has rightly been rejected.

5. The only question up for consideration in this case is what is “permanent address”? Whether it is distinct from current address and if so, in what manner?

6. The application form is at page 16 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). Columns 5 and 6 reads as under:

^^5- orZEkku irk% 224@18 lh csuhxat iks0 th0Vh0ch0 uxj bykgkckn
¼v½ fudV dk Fkkuk & Fkkuk djsyh
6- LFkkbZ irk% 224@18 lh csuhxat iks0 th0Vh0ch0 uxj bykgkckn
fudV dk Fkkuk & Fkkuk djsyh**

7. There is also a caution at the bottom of application form which says that any concealment of information or misstatement would be contrary to Rule 51 and shall be punishable under Section 30 of Arms Act. It is not in dispute that petitioner’s ancestors are resident of Village Makdoompur (Doksaha), P.S. and District Kaushambi.

8. The requirement in Clauses 5 and 6 is “current address” and “permanent address”. The word ‘address’ though by itself may have different connotations but in the context in which requirement is to be read in the form prescribed in Rule 51 is the place of residence where the applicant is residing presently and another is place of permanent residence. It has to be seen when a residence can be termed as present place of residence other than permanent residence and when both the terms namely, present residence and permanent residence constitute one and the same thing. A person may be resident of a place presently with a clear intention of shifting therefrom on occurrence of certain events or after a specified time known from very beginning to person concerned or for some other reason. Entire gamut of circumstances cannot be illustrated for the reason that the current address, i.e., the place of present residence though temporary but has to be distinguished from short visit to a particular place for some time i.e., few hours, few days and may be few weeks. For example, if a person has gone to a city for his business or purpose for professional assignment and stays there in a hotel for one, two or more days or even for one or more weeks, it cannot be said to be current address in the context in which it is required in the present case for the reason that it shall not qualify requirement of present residence of the person concerned. The current address, to my min