##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:4171]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14233/2013

Pratap Singh S/o Shri Jet Singh, R/o Village Kanwada, P.s Duni,

Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk Raj.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through District Collector And District

Magistrate, Tonk Raj.

2. Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer Raj.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avinash Dhanju

Mr. Kamlesh Kaswan

Mr. Avinash Fenin

For Respondent(s) : Mr. V.D. Gathala, AGC with

Ms. Preeti Soni

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

29/01/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

being aggrieved of the order dated 08.02.2013 vide which the

appeal filed by the petitioner bearing appeal No.

Appeal/Arms/4/12/Tonk titled as Pratap Singh versus State of

Rajasthan was dismissed and the order dated 05.08.2011 passed

by Additional District Magistrate, Tonk, vide which the application

filed by the petitioner seeking renewal of his arms license No.

2/P.S./Awan was rejected, has been confirmed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Avinash Fenin submits

that the order dated 05.08.2011, so also the order dated

08.02.2013 have been passed after solely relying upon the police

verification report dated 09.04.2010, which records the factum of

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 10:41:32 AM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:36:50 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:4171] (2 of 4) [CW-14233/2013]

FIR No. 39/95 registered against the petitioner, wherein the

petitioner was convicted vide judgment dated 24.11.2001 by the

Court of Judicial Magistrate, Class-I, Deoli, District Tonk.

3. Learned counsel further submits that the said judgment

could not have formed the sole basis for non-renewal of

petitioner’s arms license as the said criminal case does not involve

any unauthorised use of the pistol of which the petitioner was

having license at that point of time and even subsequent thereto,

there has been no such incident reported in the said police

verification report which involves any unwarranted use of the said

pistol by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel submits that there is no such bar that once

a person is convicted in any criminal case, arms license cannot be

issued or renewed in his favour. Thus, the rejection of the same

vide order dated 05.08.2011 and confirmation of same vide order

dated 08.02.2013 is not sustainable. Thus, the said orders

deserve to be set aside and accordingly, the application filed by

the petitioner seeking renewal of arms license deserves to be

allowed.

5. Per contra, Mr. V.D. Gathala, learned AGC, appearing on

behalf of respondents, vehemently argued that once a person has

been convicted in a criminal case, there is no occasion for the

respondent to renew arms license of such a person and the orders

dated 05.08.2011 and 08.02.2013 have been rightly passed.

6. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has failed to

point out any illegality in the order dated 08.02.2013 vide which

the appeal filed by him has been rejected as the facts mentioned

therein are not disputed, more so to the fact that the petitioner

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 10:41:32 AM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:36:50 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:4171] (3 of 4) [CW-14233/2013]

was duly convicted vide judgment dated 24.11.2001 and thus, the

present writ petition is misconceived and deserves to be

dismissed.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

8. The factum of the petitioner being convicted vide judgment

dated 24.11.2001 in Criminal Case No. 144/95 titled as State

versus Pratap Singh and Others by the Court of Judicial Magistrate

Class-I, Deoli, District Tonk, is not disputed. However, mere said

conviction cannot be a ground for rejection of renewal of the

petitioner’s arms license for all times to come.

9. Perusal of the order dated 05.08.2011, so also the order

dated 08.02.2013 makes it manifest that the said conviction is the

solitary ground raised in the police verification report which has

formed the basis of rejection of petitioner's arms license. Other

contents o