SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(MP) 121

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Pawan Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Greeshm Jain for petitioner; Aman Pandey, Panel Lawyer for respondent.

ORDER

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 3.4.2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur, whereby, the appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959, has been dismissed and the order dated 5.7.2018 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Licencing Authority has been affirmed.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is in the business of mining and after considering his antecedents and necessity, he was granted arm licence No.67/2002 DM/Jabalpur for revolver under the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959 and the Rules made thereunder.

3. The petitioner submits that he has never misused the said arm and has never violated any of the terms and conditions incorporated in the licence. The licence of the petitioner was renewed from time to time and the last renewal was effective till 4.7.2018. The petitioner made an application for renewal of the said licence under section 15 of the Arms Act, 1959, however, vide order dated 5.7.2018 (Annexure P/4), the Licencing Authority by a non-speaking order, refused to renew the licence of the petitioner only on the ground that there is criminal record against the petitioner. The sai

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top