Hon’ble Sunil Hali, J.—The Arms Act 1959 was enacted to regulate the acquisition, possession or carrying of fire-arms and ammunition and to provide punishment for contravention of the statutory provisions. The statement of objects and reasons appended to the Act indicates that the rigours of the Arms Act, 1878 and rules thereunder continue to make it difficult for law abiding citizens to possess fire-arms for self-defence whereas terrorists, dacoit-gangs and other anti-social or anti-national elements were using not only civilian weapons but also bombs, hand-grenades, bren-guns, sten-guns, 303 bore service rifles and revolvers of military type, for perpetrating heinous crimes against society and the State, therefore, it was only to codify the law relating to the possession of arms that the Act was enacted. It is also well settled law that right to life is the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In case, a citizen feels that he requires fire-arm for his personal security, then it is bounden duty of the authority concerned to consider and decide the application in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.

2. The petitioner’s application for grant of fire-arm licence was rejected by the District Magistrate respondent No. 2 by order dated 4.12.2006 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) only on the ground that the petitioner had failed to bring on record any material indicating that the petitioner has any actual threat to his life and the petitioner is a short tampered person and gets provoked instantly and hence the need of the petitioner for grant of fire-arm licence was not genuine. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Commissioner Bareilly Region, Bareilly, which was numbered as Appeal No. 44/2006-07 under Section 18 was also dismissed by respondent No. 3 by an order dated 5.3.2008 finding no ground to interfere with the order of District Magistrate. This order is subject-matter of challenge before this Court.

3. Petitioner has assailed the aforesaid orders inter alia on the grounds that the Licensing Authority and the Appellate Authority have overlooked the police report dated 4.11.2006 as well as the recommendation of the SDM, Bilaspur dated 7.11.2006 submitted in favour of the petitioner for granting fire-arm license and thus committed manifest error in law.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

5. In order to adjudicate the matter, provisions of Sections 13 and 14 of the Arms Act, 1959 are necessary which are reproduced hereunder :

13. Grant of licenses.—(1) An application for the grant of a license under Chapter II shall be made to the licensing authority and shall be in such form, contain such particulars and be accompanied by such fee, if any, as may be prescribed.

(2) On receipt of an application, the licensing authority shall call for the report of the officer in charge of the nearest police station on that application, and such officer shall send his report within the prescribed time.

(2A) The licensing authority, after such inquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, and after considering the report received under sub-section (2), shall, subject to the other provisions of this Chapter, by order in writing either grant the licence or refuse to grant the same:

Provided that where the officer in charge of the nearest police station does not send his report on the application within the prescribed time, the licensing authority may, if it deems fit, make such order, after the expiry of the prescribed time, without further waiting for that report.

(3) The licensing authority shall grant —

(a) a license under Section 3 where the license is required —

(i) by a citizen of India in respect of a smooth bore gun having a barrel of not less than twenty inches in length to be used for protection or spot or in respect of a muzzle loading gun to be used for bona fide crop protection:

Provided that where having regard to the circum