A firearm licence cannot be cancelled without prior notice to the holder, especially when no conviction has occurred.

1. Since the issue involved in the present petition is in narrow compass, with the joint request of learned advocates appearing for the parties, the petition is being heard and finally decided.

1A. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Ishan Joshi waives service of notice of Rule for the respondents.

2. This petition is filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, in which, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.07.2020 passed by respondent No.3 Sub Division Magistrate as well as the order dated 19.10.2020 passed by respondent No.2 District Magistrate whereby the licence issued in favour of the petitioner under the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959 ("the Arms Act" for short) has been cancelled.

2A. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rutvij S. Oza for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Ishan Joshi for the respondents.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that since the year 2013, the petitioner was having valid firearm licence bearing Licence No.SDM / WSD / 03/2013 issued by respondent No.3 for protection of crops. It is submitted that the said licence was renewed from time to time. However, respondent No.3 cancelled the licence issued in favour of the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 22.07.2020 on the ground that the FIR being registration C.R. No.11211030200055 of 2020 has been registered against the petitioner before Lakhtar Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under S.504 and S.506(2) of the Indian Penal Code . It is submitted that before cancellation of the licence, respondent No.3 Sub Divisional Magistrate has not issued any notice to the petitioner and, thereby, respondent No.3 has violated the principles of natural justice. In support of the said contention, learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Harising Haransing Khosla v. E.F. Deboo Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad reported in 1969 GLR 769.
3.1 Learned advocate Mr.Oza thereafter contended that the respondent authority can suspend or revoke the licence issued under the Arms Act, if the concerned licence holder has been convicted in any offence under the Arms Act or the Rules framed thereunder. In the present case, merely the FIR is registered against the petitioner, that too, under the provisions of S.504 and S.506(2) of the Indian Penal Code . However, till date, there is no order of conviction passed against the petitioner and, therefore, it was not open for respondent No.3 to cancel the licence of the petitioner. In support of the said contentions, reliance is placed on the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Kumarbhai Laljibhai Malhotra v. State of Gujarat reported in 2007(1) GLR 166 .
3.2 It is further submitted that the petitioner filed an Appeal before the appellate authority i.e. respondent No.2 District Magistrate. However, respondent No.2 has not considered the relevant aspects and thereby rejected the appeal of the petitioner. He, therefore, urged that both the impugned orders be quashed and set aside.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader opposed this petition and submitted that no error is committed by respondent No.3 while cancelling the licence of the petitioner on the ground of registration of the FIR.

5. I have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned advocates for the parties and I have perused the material placed on record as well as the decisions, on which, the reliance is placed by learned advocate for the petitioner. From the record, it would emerge that the petitioner was holding firearm licence issued under the provisions of the Arms Act in the year 2003. Thereafter, the same was renewed from time