Rajashri Rajaram Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 634 OF 2014 Rajashri Rajaram Patil

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Ketan A. Chothani for the Petitioner Mr. K. V. Saste, A.P.P for the Respondent-State CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

WEDNESDAY, 30 th JANUARY 2019 P.C. :

Heard for some time. Request made by petitioner for possessing a gun in self defence in the year 2009 remained pending and after adverse order passed by first Authority on 22nd August 2012 and appellate order dated 22nd May 2013 upholding it, present petition has been filed on 11th July 2013. This Court has issued notice to respondents on 11th June 2014.

Thus, the need of weapon felt way back in 2009 is being examined by this Court, almost after ten years. 1/3

According to petitioner, as petitioner-a woman is required to travel frequently through forest to visit agricultural property, weapon is necessary. Authorities in impugned order have found it not necessary.

Petitioner submits that report submitted by Authorities and reasons which prompted them to submit a negative recommendation were not made available to the petitioner. After ten years, we are not inclined to delve into these niceties. If the need still exists, petitioner can move a proper application explaining the need. Authorities can examine it independently ignoring the orders already passed and take suitable decision at the earliest.

As the request appears to be pending since long, if fresh application is moved by the petitioner within four weeks from today, the Competent Authority shall try to pass suitable order as per law at the earliest.

2/3

With these directions, we dispose of the petition. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

3/3