IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No. 3359 OF 2018

02^nd December, 2025 Between:

Mohammed Fakruddin …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana & 6 others …Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3^rd and 4^th Respondent in not renewing the Petitioners Arms License No. NZB/3465/2012 for the weapon N.P. Bore-22 Revolver bearing No. 125104959 vide CCLAS. Proc.No.LA.II (A)/195/2016 dt. 06.12.2017 and Proc.No.C1/771/2015-M dt. 20.02.2016 respectively as illegal and arbitrary in the interest of justice and may pass…”

2. Heard Mr. Vonjari Raja Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.2,5 and 7.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the rejection of renewal of his arms license by the Licensing Authority, which was confirmed by order dated 20.02.2016, and further upheld by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 06.12.2017. The petitioner, therefore, seeks an appropriate direction from this Court to the respondents to renew his arms license.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is engaged in the transport business and is required to travel frequently across state borders. He contends that the petitioner had prior disputes with an individual who is a known rowdy sheeter and, as such, there exists a genuine threat to his life. The petitioner therefore requires a firearm license for his personal safety and protection. It is further submitted that the earlier grant of license was based on an incident that occurred in May 2010, and since similar circumstances continue to prevail, the Licensing Authority ought to have considered the petitioner’s situation and renewed the license. Learned counsel also contends that the Threat Perception Report prepared by the Police is erroneous and lacks proper assessment of the prevailing situation.

Hence, he prays for interference with the impugned orders.

5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home supports the impugned orders and submits that the petitioner’s application for renewal of the arms license was duly considered by the competent authority. After obtaining and examining the Threat Perception Report from the concerned Police, the Licensing Authority rightly rejected the renewal application. The Appellate Authority also independently evaluated the matter and confirmed the rejection order passed by the Licensing Authority. It is further submitted that the entire process was conducted in compliance with principles of natural justice, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner, his reply was duly considered, and a reasoned order was passed thereafter. Hence, no grounds are made out for interference by this Court, and the petition deserves to be dismissed.

6. I have perused the material available on record.

7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was originally granted an arms license on 15.05.2012. Upon the expiry of the license period on 14.05.2015, the petitioner applied for renewal. The Licensing Authority, based on a report from the Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad, which in turn was prepared after an enquiry by the Station House Officer, Kamareddy found that there was no subsisting threat to the petitioner’s life and, therefore, did not recommend renewal of the license. Based on the said report, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner, to which he submitted his reply dated 05.02.2016 reiterating his request for renewal. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner’s justification for renewal was solely based on the alleged threat to his life, without any additional material in support thereof.

8. Upon co