Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
Mahant Bhagwati Prasad Chela Late Mahant Janki Das – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P and Others – Respondents
Matters Under Article 227 No. 3555 of 2024
Decided On : 12-08-2024
(A) Constitution of India - Article 21 - Right to personal liberty - The petitioner sought the release of his license book, which was illegally retained by the police, asserting that the police's actions violated his rights. The court found that the police had misplaced the license book and directed its return to the petitioner. (Paras 1, 2, 10)
(B) Police Misconduct - The court noted the negligence and casual approach of the police in handling the petitioner's license book, leading to a violation of his rights. The Superintendent of Police was directed to take appropriate action against the responsible officers. (Paras 9, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the release of his license book, which was seized by the police during an investigation. The police failed to return the book despite a magistrate's order.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the police had misplaced the license book and directed its return to the petitioner with an extended validity.
Issues: The main issue was whether the police's retention of the license book constituted a violation of the petitioner's rights under Article 21.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the police's actions were negligent and violated the petitioner's right to personal liberty, necessitating the return of the license book.
Result: Petition partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
1. Heard Shri Vinay Misra, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Dr. V.K. Singh, learned Government Advocate assisted by Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and perused the material placed on record.
2. This Court vide order dated 05.08.2024 had passed the following order:
“Heard Shri Abhijit Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Dr. V.K. Singh, learned Government Advocate assisted by Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and perused the material placed on record.
This Court vide order dated 01.08.2024 had passed the following order:
“Heard Sri Abhijeet Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. V.K. Singh, learned Government Advocate assisted by Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AGA-I for the State as well as perused the record.
The instant writ petition has been filed seeking following main reliefs:
“(I) Issue an order or direction thereby setting aside the order dated 08.02.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No. 964 of 2024 (Mahant Bhagwati Prasad Das Vs. State) by which the Criminal Revision so preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No. 19 was rejected upon wrong ascertainment of facts, contained as Annexure No. 1 to this petition, in the interest of justice.
(II) Issue an order or direction thereby setting aside the order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No. 19, Sultanpur by which the application dated 16.05.2023 so preferred by the petitioner for providing him his license book in its original which was being illegally kept by the local police from the date of alleged occurrence till the present was rejected, contained as Annexure No. 2 to this petition, in the interest of justice.
(III) Issue an order or direction to the concerned authorities for providing to the petitioner original copy of the license No. 298 on which his revolver bearing No. H3767 is entered and which presently is being illegally kept back by the police authorities for no valid rhyme and reason, in the interest of justice.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police of Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur had seized a revolver of the petitioner bearing No. H3767 with twenty live cartridges alongwith license book illegally and with arbitrary manner on the basis of a false case shown against the petitioner bearing Case Crime No. 550/2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/25/27/30 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur.
He further submits that the petitioner being aggrieved by the illegal action of the police of Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur filed a release application before the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 26, Sultanpur for release of the revolver bearing no. H3767 and 20 live bullets alongwith the license book. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 24.02.2023 released the aforesaid revolver bearing No. H3767 alongwith 20 live cartridges, 6 empty cartridge 32 bore and six wooden sticks with the condition that the petitioner shall give a surety of Rs.1,50,000/-. However, the license book of the petitioner was not released and no order was passed in the order dated 24.02.2023 by the learned Magistrate with regard to the license book.
He further submits that after the order dated 24.02.2023 was passed, the revolver no. H3767 alongwith 18 live cartridges and 6 empty cartridges 32 bore were released in favour of the petitioner by the police on 15.05.2023 in pursuance to the order dated 24.02.2023. However, the license book which was illegally seized by the police was not ordered by the learned Magistrate to be released. Thus, the petitioner moved an application before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 19, Sultanpur on 16.05.2023 for release of the license book, which was seiz
AI
The court affirmed that police negligence in retaining a license book violated the petitioner's rights under Article 21, necessitating its return.
In order to constitute the offence under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, it has to be established that there was a lawful order promulgated by a public servant empowered to promulgated it....
The court ruled that prior exoneration does not prevent prosecution if new evidence arises, validating the cognizance taken against the petitioner for violations under IPC and the Arms Act.
Destruction of deposited weapons without statutory notice and procedural compliance under Arms Act and Rules is illegal and arbitrary.
Renewal of an arms licence can be denied based on public safety concerns and the applicant's criminal conviction, emphasizing the need for timely applications.
The subjective satisfaction in administrative decisions must be based on tangible evidence, not mere speculation, to ensure fair treatment under the law.
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.
Rule 17 of the Arms Rules, 2016 pertains to registration of licence outside licencing authority and change of address with existing licencing authority.4
The court established that the refusal to renew an arms licence must be based on substantial evidence and proper application of discretion, not merely on pending criminal charges.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
