JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Tanzeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 01.11.2019 passed by the Commissioner Bareilly Division Bareilly in Appeal No. 00614 of 2018 filed under Section 18 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 as well as the order dated 22.03.2018 passed by the District Magistrate, Badaun in Case No. 08 of 2014 under Section 17-(3) of the Act of 1959.

3. Though time was granted to the learned Standing Counsel to file counter affidavit vide order dated 18.03.2021 but till date no counter affidavit has been filed.

4. Today when the matter is taken up, it is argued by the learned Standing Counsel that since pure questions of law is involved in the present case, writ petition could be decided on merits even in the absence of the counter affidavit.

5. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that the petitioner was granted an Arms License in the year 2004 and she never misused the aforesaid arm at any point of time as well as she was never involved in any offence of criminal nature whatsoever. On 03.11.2013 an incident of murder had taken place at Mohalla Khandsari, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Badaun and in this regard a report was lodged against the unknown persons by one Harish which was registered as Case Crime No. 980 of 2013 under section 452, 302 IPC of Police Station-Kotwali, District-Budaun.

6. During the investigation some of the family members of the petitioner including her husband has been falsely implicated in the said offence. Pursuant to the aforesaid, the petitioner was directed to deposit her fire arm in the police station, which was duly deposited by her on 21.11.2013. It is further stated that in the Session Trial No. 86 of 2014 arising out of Crime No. 980 of 2013 under Section 452, 302/34 and 302/120-B IPC, the husband of the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial court.

7. In view of the aforesaid, a case was registered against the petitioner under Section 17 (3) of the Arms Act, 1959. Immediately thereafter vide order dated 27.12.2013 the Arms License of the petitioner was suspended and a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner in this regard that why her Arm License should not be cancelled. The petitioner duly submitted her reply / objections on 06.03.2014 to the aforesaid show cause notice. Thereafter upon the aforementioned reply of the petitioner, another documentary rebuttal on behalf of the S.S.P., Badaun through S.H.O., Kotwali, District-Badaun was filed in the Court of District Magistrate on 05.08.2014. Thereafter the fire arm license of the petitioner was cancelled by the District Magistrate, Badaun vide order dated 23.02.2018.

8. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, a statutory appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly as provided under Section 18 of the Act, 1959 being Appeal No. 00614 of 2018. It is argued that various grounds were taken in the appeal but without considering the same, the order dated 01.11.2019 was passed by the Commissioner rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

9. It is argued by Shri Tanzeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause for cancellation of the arm license of the petitioner has now been ended since the husband of the petitioner has been acquitted in the said criminal case whereas the brother-in-law (devar) of the petitioner is also no more. It is further argued that both the orders namely the order passed by the District Magistrate cancelling the arm license of the petitioner as well as the order passed by the Commissioner of the Division rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner are absolutely illegal and both are liable to be set aside. It is further argued that law is well settled that if some relative of the license holder is invo