Authorities must provide clear evidence of violation for the cancellation of a firearm license; reliance on vague police reports is insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 18.08.2021 and 19.02.2022 passed by respondent no. 3 and 2 repsectively.

(ii) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent concerned to restore the arm license no. 1097/P11 (DBBL Gun) 23682-2003 issued in favour of the petitioner."

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is having DBBL gun license and a show cause notice was issued for cancellation of the license against which the petitioner has filed his reply dated 09.10.2020 before the District Magistrate, Ghazipur. The District Magistrate, Ghazipur by order dated 18.08.2021 has cancelled the fire arm license of petitioner on the ground that petitioner had purchased 110 bullets from the year 2017 to 2019, however, out of which 37 bullets were used for firing at public place (celebratory firing) and as such the same is the violation of Rule 32 of the ARMS RULES , 2016.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the order dated 18.08.2021 passed by District Magistrate, Ghazipur to submit that as per the aforesaid order a finding has been recorded that the petitioner has informed that 37 bullets were used for firing at public place. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no admission was made by petitioner to the aforesaid effect. Learned counsel for petitioner, in this respect, has relied upon reply which is at page 32 of the paper book to submit that no such admission has been made in the reply submitted by petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that State has relied upon the report of the SHO of the concerned police station which is at page 25 of paper book to submit that in the aforesaid report it has been recorded by the police station concerned that the petitioner has informed that the petitioner has used 37 bullets for firing (celebratory firing) at public place. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aforesaid fact as recorded in report dated 21.09.2019 is without any foundation. He submits that neither any statement was given to the police station by the petitioner nor there exists any document before the police station or in the report that the petitioner has given any such statement. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the police station concerned could not have on its own recorded absurd finding of misuse of weapon at public place when the place where aforesaid weapon was used has not been defined in the report nor the date has been fixed of the use of the aforesaid weapon. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that even appellate authority has verbatim recorded the findings which were made by District Magistrate Ghazipur. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that impugned orders are bad in law as there is no admission on the part of petitioner that petitioner has used the weapon at a public place for celebratory firing. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the only foundation existing is the admission of petitioner as per the said case as well as report of police station. The report of police station does not indicate as to when the statement of the petitioner was recorded admitting that the petitioner has used the weapon at a public place nor the date and time of use has been stated. He submits that the report is wholly vague in nature and could not have been foundation for proceeding against the petitioner for cancell