Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
JOPU JOHN – Appellant
Versus
THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner holds an arms licence and timely renewal requested. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's argument for five-year renewal from decision date. (Para 2) |
| 3. court acknowledges authority's delay impacts renewal period. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the holder of an Arms licence bearing number 194/NBR, which was to expire on 28.02.2021. Accordingly, the petitioner duly submitted an application for renewal before the respondent on 16.11.2020. The application was finally processed and orders passed only on 03.05.2023, renewing the licence from
01.03.2021 to 28.02.2026.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits based on Section 15 of the Arms Act , 1959 and relying on the judgments passed by this Court inMohammed Asharaf V.P. v. District Collector, Malappuram [2017(4) KHC 295] and Unnikammed E.K. alias Kunhu v. District Magistrate, Malappuram [2020(6) KHC 586] that the licence ought to have been renewed for a period of 5 years from the date of its issue and not from the date of his application seeking renewal as there was considerable delay in passing orders on the renewal application, which cannot be attributed to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, contend
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
