Prashant v. Union Of India And ANR.
$~65 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ PRASHANT .....Appellant Through:
Mr.
Mahesh Agarwal, Advocate along with Appellant-in-Person.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Udit Dedhiya- SPC along with Ms. Apurva Sachdev, Mr. Preyansh Gupta, Advocate & Ms. Neha MishraGP for Respondent No.1/Union of India.
Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh & Ms.
Parul Goyal, Advocates for Respondent No.2/ National Rifle Association of India.
Mr. Ritwik Prakash, Ms. Aashita Khanna & Mr. Vidushpat Singhania, Advocates for Respondent No.3/U.P.
State Rifle Association.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA
O R D E R
% 18.05.2026 CM APPL. 31278/2026 (Exemption) 1.
Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.
The Application stands disposed of.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
CM APPL. 31279/2026 (Condonation of Delay) 3.
Heard the learned Counsel for the Parties.
4.
Having gone through the contents of the Application seeking condonation of delay, the Application is allowed and the delay of fourteen days in filing the accompanying Letters Patent Appeal is hereby condoned. 5.
The Application stands disposed of.
6.
This intra-Court Appeal seeks to challenge an order dated 20.03.2026 ("Impugned Order") whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed W.P.(C) 3633/2026 ("Writ Petition") instituted by the Appellant against an order / communication dated 27.09.2025 by the Secretary General, National Rifle Association of India whereby the Appellant was informed that his application for membership of the National Rifle Association of India has been rejected.
7.
The learned Single Judge has dealt with the issue raised before him and has concluded that in absence of any vested legal rights, the question regarding membership of the Appellant cannot be considered in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950. 8.
Further, learned Single Judge has also concluded that the Appellant has been denied the membership on the ground of misconduct / misbehaviour. Such an issue in our considered opinion would necessarily require adjudication of questions of facts, which would be impermissible for the Court to determine in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950. For the reason that the same would require the Parties to adduce evidence in support of their respective cases. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
9.
For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any irregularity or flaw in the Impugned Order passed by the learned Single Judge. 10.
Resultantly, the Appeal is hereby dismissed.
11.
So far as the grievance of the Appellant that he is unable to import the ammunition for practice purposes, we leave it open to the Appellant to take recourse to appropriate remedy, which may be available to him under law. 12.
We may also reiterate the observation made by the learned Single Judge that even for membership of National Rifle Association of India, the grievance of the Appellant can better be addressed in an appropriate proceeding before the Court of competent civil jurisdiction. There shall be no order as to costs.
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TEJAS KARIA, J MAY 18, 2026/ 'A'
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.