The right to own a firearm is not a fundamental right in India and is subject to the discretion of the licensing authority. The grant of arms license is a privilege and not a right, and it is essential to provide a valid reason for granting an arms license.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Neelabh Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Om Prakash Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.

2. The present petition has been filed inter-alia with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 11.12.2014 and order dated 31.01.2014 passed by Commissioner Jhansi Division Jhansi and District Magistrate Jhansi respectively. Further prayer is made to direct the respondents for grant of fire arm licence of pistol in favour of the petitioner within time bound period. By the aforesaid orders the application for grant of fire-arm license of pistol in favour of the petitioner was rejected.

3. The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that petitioner has filed an application on 10.07.2012 for granting the fire-arm license in his favour for self defence and safety. The District Government Hospital issued a medical fitness certificate dated 15.10.2012 after medical examination of the petitioner. He has also submitted medical fitness and domicile certificate. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jhansi and Superintendent of Police, Jhansi have also submitted report on 22.12.2012 and 05.04.2013 in favour of the petitioner. Since time limit prescribed in the Act for grant of fire arm licence was expired and no order was passed on the said application, the petitioner preferred a petition before this Court being Writ C No.61262 of 2013, which was disposed of by this Court vide judgement and order dated 08.11.2013 directing the respondent no.2 in that petition to consider and decide the petitioner's application by a reasoned and speaking order within three months. Pursuant to the same, a decision was taken by the District Magistrate, Jhansi on 31.01.2014 by which application for grant of firearm license was rejected. Aggrieved against the aforesaid appeal was filed by the petitioner before the appellate authority as provided under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959. The said appeal was also rejected by the Commissioner, Jhansi Region, Jhansi vide its order dated December 11, 2014. Aggrieved against the aforesaid petitioner has preferred present writ petition.

4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that both the orders passed by the authorities are absolutely illegal and liable to be set aside. It is further argued that petitioner have no criminal history. The petitioner is a Practicing Advocate in District Court Jhansi since 2008 and since he is doing social work of public interest hence an urgent need of fire-arm license for the safety of his life and property. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the law laid down by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Yadav Vs. State of U.P. through Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lucknow & Ors passed in Writ C No.16298 of 2021 decided on 13.02.2023 reported in 2023 (0) Supreme (All) 487.

5. In the counter affidavit filed by the learned Standing Counsel it is stated in paragraph-5 that after the application for grant of fire-arm license was submitted by the petitioner, a report was submitted by the S.S.P., Jhansi on 05.04.2013 making objections to grant fire-arm license to the petitioner. During the pendency of the aforesaid report, writ petition in question as stated above has been filed by the petitioner in which direction was given by this Court on 08.11.2013 to the competent authority to disposed of the application for grant of fire-arm license of the petitioner within three months. After the aforesaid order was served the District Magistrate, Jhansi came to the conclusion that there is no threat to the life of petitioner, hence his application was rejected. It is further stated that the appeal filed against the aforesaid order was rightly rejected by the Commissioner, Jhansi after hearing both the parties. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that petitioner is Practicing Advocate and he has no criminal history and as such he does not required any fire-arm license.

6. In