Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11723 of 1997 =========================================================== Sunil Kumar son of Shri Jwala Prasad, resident of Mohalla-Gaurachani, Sasaram, PS-Sasaram, District-Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram

4. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram

5. The District Arms Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram

6. The SDO, Rohtas at Sasaram

7. The Officer Incharge, Sasaram Town, Rohtas

8. The Secretary, to the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. K.N.Dhoubey, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Adv.

Mr. Dineshwar Pandey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Syed A. Alam, SC-3 Mr. F. Ali Ahmad, AC to SC-3 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 12-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is a practicing advocate in Sasaram Court and at the time of filing of this application, he applied for licence. His father was also a practicing lawyer but now he is no more.

The petitioner applied for licence, as his father was intending to transfer his licence revolver in his favour. The Police report dated 5th March 1993 (Annexure-1) is in his favour, recommended for granting the licence to him, so much so that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.11723 of 1997 dt.12-02-2015 2/3 Sub-Divisional Officer, Sasaram vide his order dated 6th March 1993, has also recommended for granting the licence to him. It also appears that the District Arms Magistrate, Rohtas in his order dated 28th February 1994 (Annexure-4) has also given a favourable note in his favour recording a finding that his annual earning is Rs. 20,000/- as well as he has immovable property such as house at Sasaram, Bhabua and Varanasi but the Collector by the impugned order refused to pass favourable order in his favour on the ground that threat perception upon him has not been assessed properly, accordingly vide letter dated 7/8/ 1997 rejected the application in Arms Case No. 62/97. The Divisional Commissioner agreed with view of Collector refused to grant the licence on the same ground.

This Court is of the view that Sections 13 and 14 of the Arms Act do not postulate only condition for refusal of licence on the ground that the person having no threat perception so much so, threat perception may arise at the different stages and occasions in life.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11723 of 1997 dt.12-02-2015 3/3 practicing advocate having no criminal antecedent. The reason assigned by the Collector and the Commissioner is not a proper exercise of discretion. After such a long lapse of time it is not proper for this Court to remand back the matter again. Liberty is given to the petitioner to file a fresh application for licence if so advised. If such application is filed, the authority concerned will examine the case of the petitioner and pass the order in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of filing of the same.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U