Mansa Ram Sisodia v. State (Gnct Of Delhi) And ANR

$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 828/2016 & C.M.No.3628/2016 MANSA RAM SISODIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate.

versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Ankur Chhiber, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 02.02.2016 Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to renew the arms licence of the petitioner. Petitioner also challenges the order dated 05th July, 2013 passed by respondent No.2 whereby petitioner's arm licence was cancelled. The relevant portion of the order dated 5th July, 2013 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "In my opinion, any person involved in any criminal activity particularly under the MCOCA Act can not be a candidate for holding an arms licence or a weapon which may endanger safety and security of other citizens. After hearing both the parties and careful perusal of documents on record, I am of the opinion that the Licensing Authority, after considering all aspects of the matters, has passed a fair order and I find no reason to interfere with it. The appeal is, therefore, rejected."

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that FIR No.92/2008 was registered under Sections 3 & 4 of MCOCA Act, but the

petitioner was acquitted in the said case. The relevant portion of the judgment passed by the MCOCA Court is reproduced hereinbelow:- "56. In view of the above discussions and the judgments, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, all accused persons are acquitted. They be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other criminal case."

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent no.2 failed to appreciate that the petitioner had been falsely implicated under MCOCA.

However, this court upon a perusal of the paper book finds that the petitioner has been acquitted on the ground that prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It was not a case of false implication in criminal proceedings.

In any event, the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Jagan Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Police, W.P.(C) No.7483/2015 has held that assessment by the Licensing Authority is an assessment of fact as to the suitability of a person to hold an arms licence and which assessment of fact is ordinarily not to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction. It was also held in the said case that the law is that an arms licence is not a matter of right but a statutory privilege and of which the Licensing Authority is the absolute assessor. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the decision of respondent no.2 calls for no interference in writ jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the present writ petition and applications are

dismissed, but with no order as to costs.

MANMOHAN, J FEBRUARY 02, 2016 KA