Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satendra Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
1 WP-22822-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 22822 of 2024
SATENDRA SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Akram Khan - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri B.M.Patel - Govt. Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
The instant writ petition takes exception to the order dated 03.08.2023
passed by the District Magistrate District Bhind, whereby exercising powers under
Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, the arm license of the petitioner has been
suspended. The order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Commissioner, Chambal
Division, Morena is also under challenge whereby the appeal preferred by the
petitioner against the order of suspension of arm license has been rejected.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner
herein was granted the arm license for a 12 bore gun. The son (child in conflict
with law) of the petitioner was found to be arrayed as an accused in the Crime
No.1/2023 registered at Police Station Nayagaon, District Bhind for the
commission of offence under Sections 294, 307, 34 of IPC and enhanced Section
302 of IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act, along with one co-accused Pintu, and
therefore, a recommendation was forwarded by respondent No.3 for cancellation
of the arm license of the petitioner.
3. The respondent No.1 on receipt of the said recommendation /report, after
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
2 WP-22822-2024
issuing notice to the petitioner passed an order dated 03.08.2023, whereby the
arms license granted to the petitioner was suspended. The appeal preferred by the
petitioner against the said order was also rejected vide order dated 07.03.2024.
4. Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is a
security guard by profession, who is in need of the gun and the arm license. He
further submits that the present petitioner is working at Bhopal and he was not
implicated in the crime in question. The alleged crime was committed at Bhind,
wherein his son has been implicated and there is no allegation of use of questioned
firearm in the offence, and therefore, the arms license granted to him could not
have been suspended. By placing reliance upon the judgments of this Court in the
case of Abdul Saleem Vs. State of M.P. and Ors. (2019) 3 MPLJ 332, and the
decision by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.3710/2021 decided on
27.09.2022, the counsel for petitioner submits that the requirement of Section
17(3)(b) of recording of subjective satisfaction by the licensing authority is not
fulfilled in the impugned suspension order dated 03.08.2023, in view whereof, the
impugned order is unsustainable. Counsel further submits that it is well settled in
law that mere registration of criminal case is not a ground sufficient for suspension
of the arms license. Even otherwise, the registration of the criminal case is not
against the present petitioner but his son. The appeal preferred by the petitioner
has been decided by an unreasoned order and on these grounds, the orders
impugned in the instant writ petition deserves to be set aside and quashed and arms
license deserves to be restored.
5. On the other hand, counsel appearing for the State/respondent opposes the
prayer and submits that it is an admitted position of fact that the son of the
petitioner has been implicated in an offence under Section 302 of IPC. The
allegation against the son of the petitioner is of use of a firearm (desi katta). The
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
3 WP-22822-2024
co-accused in the matter, namely, Pintu who happens to be uncle (baba) of son of
the petitioner has used the license 315 bore gun in the offence in question and
therefore, looking to the possibility of use of the questioned firearm and
disturbance of public tranquility, peace and safety, the recommendation was
forwarded by the Superintendent of Police for cancellation of the arms license.
The licensing authority after following the process of law has only suspended the
arms license and the reasons of suspension /subjective satisfaction of the licensing
authority is duly recorded in the order impugned. Since no infirmity is there in the
impugned order dated 03.08.2023, the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been
rightly rejected.
6. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.
7 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
available on record.
8. The issue arising for consideration before this Court is as to whether, the
order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the respondent No.1 suspending the arms
license of the petitioner fulfills the requirement of subjective satisfaction of the
licensing authority as laid down under Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959 and
as to whether, the registration of a criminal case against the son of the petitioner
can be said to be a ground enough for suspension of the arms license of the
petitioner.
9. Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959 reads as under :-
17. Variation, suspension and revocation of licences.
(1)The licensing authority may vary the conditions subject to which a licence has been
granted except such of them as have been prescribed and may for that purpose require the licence
holder by notice in writing to deliver-up the licence to it within such time as may be specified in
the notice.
(2)The licensing authority may, on the application of the holder of a licence, also vary the
conditions of the licence except such of them as have been prescribed.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
4 WP-22822-2024
(3)The licensing authority may by order in writing suspend a licence for such period as it
thinks fit or revoke a licence-
(a)if the licensing authority is satisfied that the holder of the licence is prohibited by this
Act or by any other law for the time being in force, from acquiring, having in his possession or
carrying any arms or ammunition, or is of unsound mind, or is for any reason unfit for a licence
under this Act; or
(b)if the licensing authority deems it necessary for the security of the public peace or for
public safety to suspend or revoke the licence; or
(c)if the licence was obtained by the suppression of material information or on the basis of
wrong information provided by the holder of the licence or any other person on his behalf at the
time of applying for it; or
(d)if any of the conditions of the licence has been contravened; or
(e)if the holder of the licence has failed to comply with a notice under sub-section (1)
requiring him to deliver-up the licence.
(4)The licensing authority may also revoke a licence on the application of the holder
thereof.
(5)Where the licensing authority makes an order varying a licence under sub-section (1) or
an order suspending or revoking a licence under sub-section (3), it shall record in writing the
reasons therefor and furnish to the holder of the licence on demand a brief statement of the same
unless in any case the licensing authority is of the opinion that it will not be in the public interest to
furnish such statement.
(6)The authority to whom the licensing authority is subordinate may by order in writing
suspend or revoke a licence on any ground on which it may be suspended or revoked by the
licensing authority; and the foregoing provisions of this section shall, as far as may be, apply in
relation to the suspension or revocation of a licence by such authority.
(7)A Court convicting the holder of a licence of any offence under this Act or the rules
made thereunder may also suspend or revoke the licence:
Provided that if the conviction is set aside on appeal or otherwise, the suspension or revocation
shall become void.
(8)An order of suspension or revocation under sub-section (7) may also be made by an
Appellate Court or by the HighCourt when exercising its powers of revision.
(9)The Central Government may, by order in the Official Gazette, suspend or revoke or
direct any licensing authority to suspend or revoke all or any licences granted under this Act
throughout India or any part thereof.
(10)On the suspension or revocation of a licence under this section the holder thereof shall
without delay surrender the licence to the authority by whom it has been suspended or revoked or
to such other authority as may be specified in this behalf in the order of suspension or revocation.
10. The issue governing the subjective satisfaction of the licensing authority
and the phrase “public peace and public safety” has been considered by the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Abdul Saleem Vs. State of M.P. and
Ors. (2019) 3 MPLJ 332, and this Court in the case of Abdul Saleem (Supra) has
held as under:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
5 WP-22822-2024
9. On perusal of the aforesaid, it is clear that the licensing
authority may suspend the licence for such period as it thinks
fit or revoke it, if it is satisfied that the holder of the licence is
prohibited by the Act or by any other law for the time being
in force to acquire and having in his possession or carrying
any arms or ammunition, or is of unsound mind, or is for any
reason unfit to hold a licence. As per sub- section (b), the
licensing authority may suspend or revoke the licence if “it
deems necessary” for “the security of the public peace or for
public safety”. The licence may also be suspended or revoked
if it was obtained by the suppression of material information
or on the basis of wrong information or in contravention of
any of the conditions of the licence. In addition, if the
licensing authority wants to vary the condition, to which
notice has been issued, if not complied, it can suspend or
revoke the licence under sub-section (1) of the Section 17 of
the Act. While passing the order of suspension or revocation,
the authority shall record a reason and furnish it to the holder
on demand by a brief statement unless in his/her opinion it
will not be in the public interest. As per sub-section (6), the
authority, to whom, the licensing authority is subordinate
may also have power to suspend or revoke the licence similar
to the licensing authority. The Court trying the offence, if
convicted the holder of a licence of any offence under this
Act or the Rules, may also suspend or revoke the licence but
in case if the conviction is set aside in appeal, the suspension
or revocation shall become void. The power of suspension or
revocation has also been conferred to the appellate Court or
the High Court akin to sub-section (7) of Section 17 of the
Act.
10. Thus, for the purpose of the case at hand and on reading
the aforesaid, while exercising the power under Section 17(3)
(b) of the Act, the licensing authority must record its
satisfaction to the effect(9) that by an act of licensee “theSignature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:169356 WP-22822-2024
security of the public peace or public safety” is on peril or
going to be affected, therefore, revocation of licence is
necessary.
11. The phrase “Public Peace and Public Safety” is defined in
Advance Law Lexicon 5th Edition by Shakeel Ahmed Khan
by which it do not mean ordinary disturbance of law and
order, it is said that the public safety means safety of public at
large and not safety of few persons only. The words “security
of public peace” have also been defined in the Advanced Law
Lexicon to mean “maintenance of public tranquility and
order”. It is in reference to the Division Bench judgment of
this Court in the case of Sunderlal Bhardwaj v. State reported
in 1961 MPLJ Note 80.
12. The word “public” is having some significance to the
above said phrase as referred in Section 17(3)(b) of the Act
relatable to peace and safety. As per Corpus Juris Secundum,
the word “public” is defined as meaning the whole body
politic, or all the citizens of the state; the general body of
mankind, or of a nation, state, or community; everybody; the
people; the body of the people at large; the community at
large, without reference to the geographical limits of any
corporation like a city, town, or county. “Public” is also
defined or employed as meaning the inhabitants of a
particular place; all the inhabitants of a particular place; the
people the neighborhood; a particular body or section of the
people; often, specifically, a clientele. The word “public”,
however, does not mean everybody all the time; it does not
mean all of the people in the state, or in any county or town.
It does not mean all the people, or most of the people, or very
many of the people of a place, but so many of them as
contradistinguishes them from a few. It designates
individuals in general without restriction or selection.
“Public” also means of, or relating to, the government, and it
may be defined as meaning owned by the public, that is, by
the government or some of its sub divisions, as a publicSignature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:169357 WP-22822-2024
building, public courthouse, etc. “Public” is also the term
used in designating the legal character of various acts, rights,
occupations, etc. that affect or belong to the collective body
of a state or community.
“Public” is also defined as meaning shared in or to
be shared or participated in or enjoyed by the
people at large; open to all; common to all or
many; pen to common or general use; general;
open for general or common use or entertainment,
as a public highway or road, a public house; not
limited or restricted to any particular class of the
community. Thus, affecting the security of public
peace and safety, it should not affect a few but the
inhabitants of a particular place because it is a
synonymous of People distinguished from private.
11. The issue as to whether, the registration of the criminal case without
there being any finding as regards the involvement of the licensed arm in the said
criminal case can be a ground sufficient for suspension/ revocation of the arms
license has also been considered by this Court in the case of Abdul Saleem
(Supra), and it has been held as under :-
25. This Court in the case of Mahendra Singh Bhadauria v. State of
M.P. and others reported in 2009(1) MPLJ 540 considered the issue
regarding suspension of the arm licence on account of seizure of 30
rounds (live cartridges) from the possession of the petitioner and
registration of criminal case under the Act. The Court was of the
opinion that the authority was not justified to suspend the arm licence
merely due to pendency of the criminal case.
26. In the context of the statutory provision of the Act and the
interpretation made by the aforementioned judgments, the parameters
which can be broadly carved out for suspension or revocation of the arm
licence, are as under:-
(i) Power of suspension or revocation of the licence are with
the authorities, when “it deems necessary”, after “subjective
satisfaction” for “the security of public peace and publicSignature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:169358 WP-22822-2024
safety”.
(ii) Public Peace would mean the “maintenance of public
tranquility and order” and the public safety includes security
of public or their freedom from danger, it does not mean law
and order or affect the individual.
(iii) The authority may exercise the power of suspension or
revocation with due care and caution even in pending or
disposed criminal cases on proof of use or misuse or threat
given by use of the said weapon.
(iv) In the order of suspension and revocation, the reasons
ought to be recorded by the authority and furnish it to the
holder on demand unless its supply is prohibited in public
interest.
(v) The power of licensing authority is under the supervisory
control of the higher authority as per Section 17(6) of the Act
and Rule 5(2) of the Arms Rules.
(vi) The Court trying the offence under the Arms Act against
the licensee can also suspend or revoke the licence including
the appellate Court and the High Court.
(vii) The cases must be examined on the facts of each case
regarding sufficiency of the material and degree of danger to
the security of public peace and safety.
(viii) The action for revocation of the licence ought to be
taken affording an opportunity to the affected persons. The
aforementioned are the broad parameters which may be
looked into by the licensing authority as well as the appellate
authority while passing the order of suspension or revocation
of the arm licence. It is made clear here that the said
parameters are illustrative but not exhaustive. The authority
while exercising the power under Section 17 of the Arms Act
is having discretion conferred by the statute to examine
sufficiency of the material placed before it but the said
discretion ought to be exercised judiciously and not
arbitrarily or capriciously.
12. Admittedly, in the case in hand, there is no allegation of the licensed
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16935
9 WP-22822-2024
arm of the petitioner being used in the crime in question even the present petitioner
is not an accused in the said crime. The order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the
respondent No.1 District Magistrate/Collector, District Bhind, though states that
he is satisfied from the report received from the office of Superintendent of Police
and he does not deem it appropriate in the public interest that the fire arm remains
with the petitioner. However, the said finding cannot be said to be fulfilling the
criteria of “subjective satisfaction of the authority concerned” as is required under
law as there is no material on record in support thereof. The orders impugned in
the instant writ petition when tested on the anvil of the law laid down in the case of
Abdul Saleem (Supra), cannot be given the stamp of approval and therefore, the
order dated 03.08.2023 passed by licensing authority and the order dated
07.03.2024 passed by the appellate authority are hereby set aside. The matter is
remitted to respondent No.1 District Magistrate/Collector, District Bhind to pass
an order afresh as regards the arms license of the petitioner, keeping in view the
preposition of law laid down in the case of Abdul Saleem (Supra). The exercise be
completed within a period of 90 days.
13. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed and disposed of.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
Adnan
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ADNAN HUSAIN
ANSARI
Signing time: 8/21/2025
3:21:29 PM