Indrajeet Pandharinath Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

pmw 1/2 wp-4137.14.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4137 OF 2014 Shri Indrajeet Pandharinath Gaikwad

...Petitioner

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

---- Ms. Saili N. Dhuru i/b. Kuldeep Patil for the Petitioner. Smt. S.D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent - State. ---- CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 6th NOVEMBER 2019.

P.C.:

Heard Ms. Saili Dhuru for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has demonstrated need of fire arm and as such impugned orders are unsustainable.

The learned APP submits that all relevant factors are looked into by the Competent Authority and request was rejected on 23rd October 2013. Statutory appeal against it was also rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 5th August 2014. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity.

pmw 2/2 wp-4137.14.doc With the assistance of respective counsel we have perused papers. Petitioner has pointed out some instances in his complaint which induced him to apply for such license. In application addressed to Police Commissioner on 12th September 2012 he has also pointed out a call allegedly from Dubai.

The matter has remained pending with this Court from 25th September 2014 without any orders. Petitioner has not pointed out any incident which has taken place in the meanwhile to substantiate his concern.

As such we are not inclined to intervene in extraordinary jurisdiction.

However, we grant petitioner leave to apply afresh if apprehension still subsists. If such application is moved by him, it shall be decided independently on its own merit without getting influenced by impugned orders. With these observations and liberty, petition is disposed of.

(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.) (B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)