Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
(DIVISION BENCH)
Sheel Nagu and S. A. Dharmadhikari, JJ.
Chhotelal Pachori v. State of M. P. & others
Writ Appeal No. 1249 of 2018 (Gwalior); against the order dated 6.7.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 23123 of 2017;
Decided on 10.1.2019
(2) Arms Act, 1959 -- Ss.13 and 14 -- expression "notwithstanding anything in S.13" in S.14 -- S. 14 would prevail upon S.13 in all situations -- S.14(1) makes it incumbent upon licensing authority to decline grant of licence if application does not pass test laid down in clauses (a) and (b) of S. 14 (1). [Paras 4.5, 5 & 5.1
(3) Arms Act, 1959 -- S.14(3) -- recording of reasons in writing for refusal of grant of licence -- is mandatory -- however, supply of said reasons to applicant may be denied in public interest. [Paras 6 & 6.1
(4) Arms Act, 1959 -- S.14(1) -- reasons assigned for rejecting application cannot be different from reasons prescribed under clauses (a) and (b) of S. 14 (1). [Paras 6.2 & 6.3
(5) Arms Act, 1959 -- Ss.13 and 14 -- new Arms Policy of State -- any policy framed by State is subservient to statutory provisions under Arms Act -- cannot provide an additional disqualification which is not provided in the Act. [Para 8
(6) Arms Act, 1959 -- Ss.13 and 14 -- reason for rejection of application for grant of licence -- absence of perceivable threat to person and security of petitioner -- this reason can be read into statutory grounds available under section 14(1). [Para 8.2
(7) Arms Act, 1959 -- Ss.13, 14(1)(b) (ii), 14(1)(b)(i)(3) and 14(3) -- rejection not based on apprehension that grant of licence would prejudice security or public peace or public safety -- merely referring to new firearm policy of State and assigning omnibus reason of absence of perceivable threat to life and security without disclosing why -- do not satisfy mandatory requirement of S.14(3) -- it was incumbent upon the State Government to have assigned proper and real reasons for taking that said view. (2010)9 SCC 496 followed. 1998(1) MPLJ 537 referred to. AIR 1987 Pat. 122 distinguished. [Paras 8.4, 9, 9.4 & 12
(8) Arms Act, 1959 -- Ss.13 and 14 (3) -- expression "shall record in writing the reasons for such refusal" in S.14 (3) -- connotes that reasons should be such which can reveal mind of licensing authority, disclosing exact cause of refusal -- merely saying that there is no perceivable threat to life and security of petitioner -- would not suffice -- especially in the face of favourable recommendations by police/District Magistrate. [Para 9.2
¼1½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 13 rFkk 14 && /kkjk 13¼1½] 13¼2½ rFkk 13 ¼2d½ ds v/khu fofgr 'krks± dh iwfrZ gks rFkk vuqKfIr vfHkizkIr djus ds fy, vPNs vk/kkj gksa && vk;q/k vf/kfu;e esa vuqKkiu izkf/kdkjh dks] /kkjk 14 esa of.kZr dkj.kksa ds flok;] vuqKfIr vuqnÙk djus ls bUdkj djus dk foosd ugha fn;k x;kA¼iSjk 4-4
¼2½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 14 esa vfHkO;fä ß/kkjk 13 esa fdlh ckr ds gksrs gq, HkhÞ && /kkjk 14 leLr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa /kkjk 13 ij vfHkHkkoh gksxh && vkosnu /kkjk 14¼1½ ds [kaM ¼d½ ,oa ¼[k½ esa vf/kdfFkr ijh{kk ij [kjk ugha mrjs rks /kkjk 14¼1½ esa vuqKfIr vuqnÙk djus ls bUdkj djuk vuqKkiu izkf/kdkjh ds fy, vfuok;Z cuk;k x;k gSA ¼iSjk 4-5] 5 ,oa 5-1
¼3½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 14¼3½ && vuqKfIr ds vuqnku ls bUdkj ds fy, fyf[kr esa dkj.k vfHkfyf[kr djuk && vkKkid gS && rFkkfi] yksd fgr esa vkosnd dks mä dkj.k crkus ls bUdkj fd;k tk ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 6 ,oa 6-1
¼4½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 14¼1½ && vkosnu ukeatwj djus ds fy, fn, x, dkj.k /kkjk 14¼1½ ds [kaM ¼d½ ,oa ¼[k½ ds v/khu fofgr dkj.kksa ls fHkUu ugha gks ldrsA ¼iSjk 6-2 ,oa 6-3
¼5½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 13 rFkk 14 && jkT; dh uohu vk;qèk uhfr && jkT; }kjk fojfpr dksbZ Hkh uhfr vk;q/k vf/kfu;e ds dkuwuh mica/kksa ds v/khu gS && ,slh vfrfjDr fujgZrk micaf/kr ugha dj ldrh tks vfèkfu;e esa micaf/kr ugha gSA ¼iSjk 8
¼6½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && vuqKfIr ds vuqnku ds fy, vkosnu dh ukeatwjh dk dkj.k && ;kph dh nsg vkSj lqj{kk dks cks/kxE; vk'kadk dk vHkko && ;g dkj.k /kkjk 14¼1½ ds v/khu miyC/k dkuwuh vk/kkjksa esa i<+k tk ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 8-2
¼7½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 13] 14¼1½¼[k½¼2½] 14¼1½¼[k½¼1½¼3½ rFkk 14¼3½ && ukeatwjh bl vk'kadk ij vk/kkfjr ugha fd vuqKfIr ds vuqnku ls lqj{kk ;k yksd 'kkafr fujkinrk izfrdwyr% izHkkfor gksxh & dsoy jkT; dh uohu vXU;k;q/k uhfr dk funsZ'k djuk rFkk fcuk ;g izdV fd, fd D;ksa] thou ,oa lqj{kk dks cks/kxE; vk'akdk ds vHkko dk cgqiz;kstuh; dkj.k nsuk && /kkjk 14¼3½ dh vkKkid vis{kk dh iwfrZ ugha gksrh && mä n`f"Vdks.k viukus ds fy, mfpr vkSj okLrfod dkj.k nsuk jkT; ds fy, vfuok;Z FkkA ¼2010½9 ,l lh lh 496 vuqlfjrA 1998¼1½ ,e ih ,y ts 537 fufnZ"VA , vkb vkj 1987 iVuk 122 izHksfnrA ¼iSjk 8-4] 9] 9-4 ,oa 12
¼8½ vk;q/k vf/kfu;e] 1959 && /kkjk 13 rFkk 14¼3½ && /kkjk 14¼3½ esa vfHkO;fä ß,sls bUdkj ds fy, dkj.k ys[ku }kjk vfHkfyf[kr djsxkÞ && rkRi;Z gS fd dkj.k ,sls gksuk pkfg, ftuls] bUdmkj dk lVhd dkj.k izdV djrs gq,] vuqKkiu izkf/kdkjh dk ekul izdV gks && ek= ;g dguk fd ;kph ds thou vkSj lqj{kk dks dksbZ cks/kxE; vk'kadk ugha gS && i;kZIr ugha gksxk && fo'ks"kr% iqfyl@ftyk eftLVªsV dh vuqdwy flQkfj'kksa ds lEeq[kA ¼iSjk 9-2
CONTEXT
1. This intra Court appeal filed under section 2(i) Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 questions the legality and validity of the order passed by writ Court dismissing Writ Petition No. 23123/2017 seeking quashment of the order of State dated 24.6.2017 by which an application for grant of firearm licence (pistol/revolver) was rejected by taking recourse to section14 (1) (b) (i) of the Arms Act, the new Firearm Policy of the State of M.P., and by assigning reason of absence of any threat to life and security of petitioner from any person or group of persons.
SUBMISSIONS
2. Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner primarily submits by relying upon the decision of this Court in Dharampal Ramnarayan Agrawal v. State of M.P. [1998(1) MPLJ 537], that while rejecting an application for firearm licence the least that is required is to assign reasons disclosing mind of the Licencing Authority (LA for brevity) for taking the adverse view for which reliance is placed on the provision of section 14(3) of Arms Act 1959 (Arms Act for brevity) which mandates/obliges the LA (State Government) to record reasons in writing and communicate the same while declining grant of licence unless public interest out weighs communication. It is further submitted that a bare perusal of impugned order Annexure P-1 reveals mere paper compliance of statutory provision by assigning reason of absence of perceivable threat to life and security of petitioner. The reasons assigned it is submitted do not qualify the impugned order to be a speaking one as per mandatory requirements under section 14(3) of Arms Act. It is submitted that even otherwise the reason of absence of threat to the life or/and security of petitioner is perverse for being in-variance to the favorable recommendation by the police station and District Magistrate, Morena who according to the petitioner are the best persons to assess the existance and extent of danger to life and security.
2.1 Learned counsel for State on the other hand contends that reasons assigned in the impugned order for refusal to grant licence may not be very elaborate but are good enough to render the impugned order a speaking one and, therefore, saving it from being sacrificed at the alter of section 14 (3) of the Arms Act and Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted by the State that the new Arms Policy of the State of M.P. empowers the licensing authority to decline grant of licence of pistol/revolver in the absence of any perceivable threat to life and security of an applicant.
CONSIDERATION
3. Bare perusal of the order impugned passed the learned Single Judge reveals that the rejection of W.P. No. 23132/2017 was primarily based on the following grounds :
1. Section 13 (2-A) of Arms Act do not oblige the licensing authority to assign reasons while refusing grant of license.
2. The textual and contextual contents of section 13 of Arms Act do not oblige the licensing authority (The State Government in the present case) to toe the line of the report submitted by the nearest police station under section 13(2) and instead is free to take its independent decision which may or may not be in conformity with the recommendations of the police station.
3. Section 14 1 (b) (i) of the Arms Act confers wide discretion upon the licensing authority to decline grant of firearms licence without assigning reasons and for any reason.
4. Looking to the prohibitory and restrictive character of the Arms Act no one has a right to arms licence since the same is a privilege given by the State which can be denied for any reason provided the same is in public interest and in accordance with the Arms Act.
4. To evaluate the rival contentions on the anvil of the Arms Act, it is necessary to closely scrutinize the relevant provisions of section 13 and 14 of the Act which form part of chapter III of the Arms Act.
4.1 Section 13 deals with grant of licence and provide
SupremeToday
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
