The competent authority has the power to revoke an arms license if it deems necessary for the security of public peace or public safety, and the scope of judicial review in such matters is limited.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.

2. Instant writ petition has been filed praying for the following main reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing thereby the impugned order dated 26.03.2021 and Order dated 06.08.2022 passed by opposite party no. 2 & 3 which are annexed as Annexure No. 1 & 2 to this writ petition.

(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 2 to 4 to revoke the suspension/revocation of the Arms License of the petitioner forthwith.

(iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 2 to 4 to release the Arms/12 bore DBBL Gun No. 19536-BE2007 Katra Bazar, District Gonda which is surrendered at Police Station Katara Bazar, District Gonda since 08.01.2022 forthwith."

3. The case set forth by the petitioner is that he was having an arms license which was issued to the petitioner on 17.12.2002. The arms license has been renewed from time to time the last renewal having been made upto 17.12.2025.

4. It is contended that on 20.10.2018, two FIRs have been lodged bearing Case Crime No. 357 of 2018 & 358 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 332, 153-A, 295-A, 504 & 506 I.P.C and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1972 against ten named persons and 40 to 50 unknown persons. However, the petitioner was not named.

5. Another FIR bearing Case Crime No. 359 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 332, 333, 336, 153-A, 323, 325, 504, 427 I.P.C read with Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1972 and Section 3 (1) of the Public Properties Act, 1984, respectively had been lodged against the 35 named persons and 31 unknown persons. In the said FIR also, the petitioner was not named in the said FIR.

6. The further contention is that the authorities of Police Station Katra Bazar recommended the suspension and cancellation of the arms license of the petitioner. In pursuance thereof, a notice was issued to which the petitioner submitted his reply but the competent authority vide order dated 26.03.2021 revoked the arms license of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal which has been rejected vide order dated 06.08.2022, a copy of which is annexure 2 to the writ petition. Being aggrieved by both the orders, the instant writ petition has been filed.

7. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that it is settled proposition of law that an arms license cannot be cancelled on the basis of pendency of criminal proceedings.

8. Reliance has also been placed on a judgment of this Court dated 19.12.2022 passed in Writ-C No. 7078 of 2004 In re; Ram Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. wherein the said proposition of law has been laid down.

9. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel on the basis of averments contained in the counter affidavit argues that the arms license of the petitioner has not been cancelled solely on the ground of pendency of criminal proceedings against him. Learned Standing counsel states that the name of the petitioner does not find place in any of the FIRs which have lodged. However, in the instant case, the competent authority has categorically recorded the conduct of the petitioner as finds place in the order impugned dated 26.03.2021 which has prevailed upon the authority to cancel the arms license of the petitioner upon a specific finding that continuance of the arms license with the petitioner would be detrimental to public peace and public safety. The said order has been upheld with the dismissal of the appeal vide order dated 06.08.2022 and there is no illegality or infirmity in the same. It is thus prayed that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

10. Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the contesting parties and perused the records.

11. From a perusal of records it emerges that the petitioner was having an arms license issued to him