Heard Sri Vinay Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties.

2. The petitioner has stated that he has ap­plied for gun license in the year 1997. Since 1997 the gun license to the petitioner was never granted. The petitioner filed a writ pe­tition in the year 2009 wherein an order was passed that the case of the petitioner may be considered in six months. In compliance of the court's order the District Magistrate has passed the impugned order dated 8.6.2010. A plain reading of the order shows that the District Magistrate has stated that the peti­tioner is a resident of Police Station Mauaima, District Allahabad and hence, the application should have been moved in Allahabad instead of district Pratapgarh and moreover, a crimi­nal case was also registered against the peti­tioner vide its No. 177A/1995 at Police Sta­tion Mauaima.

3. Later on the District Magistrate has given very strange reasoning for not grant­ing the license to the petitioner. One reason given by the District Magistrate is that people of his locality already have five revolver, five rifle, five Double Barrel Ballistic License, five Single Barrel Ballistic License, hen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document