Head Sri R.B.S. Rathour, learned counsel for petitioner, learned State counsel and perused the record.

Petitioner as per the provisions as provided under Section 13 of the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been granted a licence for DBBL gun and licence No. is 272/97.

On 27.04.1999, an F.I.R. under Section 506 IPC has been lodged against the petitioner and some other persons by Sri Rakesh Singh Rana, accordingly a Criminal Case No.120 A of 1999 has been registered against him.

Keeping in view the said facts, a recommendation has been made by the police authorities of District Raebareli for suspension of the arms licence of the petitioner in respect of DBBL Gun No. 1664. Accordingly, the impugned order/show cause notice dated 17.06.1999 has been issued to him suspending his arms licence by the O.P. No. 3/Prabhari Adhikari (Arms), Raebareli, petitioner was directed to file his reply why the same be not cancelled.

Sri R.B.S. Rathour, learned counsel for petitioner while challenging the impugned order submits that the same is in contravention to the provisions of Section 17 (3) of the Arms Act as well as the law laid down by this Court in the case of Sahab Singh Vs. Commissioner Agra Region, Agara and others, 2006 (24) LCD 374, in the case of Mulayam Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2013 (80) ACC 786 and in the case of Raj Kumar Verma Vs. State of U.P., 2013 (80) ACC 231.

He further submits that in identical circumstances, this Court has passed an order dated 28.02.2013 in Writ Petition No. 1721 (MS) of 1999, which on reproduction reads as under:-

"Heard Sri Ankit Singh holding brief of Sri R. B. S. Rathaur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. P. S. Chauhan, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that the petitioner was having an arm license No.271 for Single Barrel Gun, P.S. Kheeron, District Raibareily. The petitioner was involved in a criminal case No.120-A/1999 under section 506 IPC. So, by the impugned order dated 17.06.1999, the license was suspended. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, where this Court on 29.06.1999 has stayed the operation of the impugned order dated 17.06.1999.

Learned counsel for the petitioner informed the court that on the basis of the interim order, the petitioner is continuing with the license. Criminal Case is also over.

When it is so, then the present petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order dated 29.06.1999.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly."

Accordingly, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the impugned order/show cause notice in the present writ petition is liable to be set aside.

Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned State counsel while defending the impugned order submits that as against the petitioner and some other persons an F.I.R. under Section 506 IPC has been lodged on 27.04.1999 by Sri Rakesh Singh Rana, accordingly a Criminal Case No.120 A of 1999 has been registered against him. So, in order to maintain law and order situation, the police authorities has recommended the cancellation of arms licence, the order date 17.06.1999 has been issued suspending the petitioner's arms licence and he was required to submit his reply why the same may not be cancelled.

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959, provides for variation, suspension and revocation.

And Section 17(3) reads as under:-

Section 17(3):- The licensing authority may by order in writing suspend a licence for such period as it thinks fit or revoke a licence:--

"(a) if the licensing authority is satisfied that the holder of the licence is prohibited by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force, from acquiring, having in his possession or carrying any arms or ammunition, or is of unsound mind, or is for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act ; or

(b) if the licensing authority deems it necessary for the security