1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner & learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
2. By means of present petition, petitioner is seeking for quashing of the order dated 19.07.2021 passed by Respondent No. 2 (Commissioner, Saharanpur Mandal, Saharanpur) in Case No. 1002 of 2021 (Salman Sayeed Vs. State of U.P.) under section 18 of Arms Act, 1959 and order dated 31.10.2020 passed by Respondent No. 3 (District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar) in Case No. 574 of 2017 (State Vs. Salman Sayeed) under section 17 (3) Arms Act, 1959 by which the Firearm License No. 1326 of the petitioner of N.P.B. Riffle No. 8826 (0.302 Bore) has been suspended.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arm license has been suspended only ground that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner namely Case Crime No.1114 of 2013, under Section 188, 153-A, 353, 341 & 147 I.P.C. It is stated in paragraph 9 of the writ petition that in Case Crime No.398 of 2019, final report No.5 of 2020 has been submitted in favour of the petitioner. It is argued that the petitioner has not been misused firearm licence or there is any danger to public safety. It is further argued that license can only be cancelled only to reasons assigned to Section (3) of Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments passed by this Court in the cases of Ram Murti Madhukar vs. District Magistrate, Sitapur [1998 (16) LCD-905], Ram Karpal Singh vs. Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and Ors. [2006 (24) LCD 114] and Ram Prasad vs. Commissioner and Ors. decided on 07.02.2020 in Writ-C No. 56378 of 2006, wherein it has been held that mere pendency of criminal case or apprehension of misuse of arms are not sufficient grounds for passing the order of suspension or revocation of licence under Section 17 of the Act.
[ad_1]
Source link