Surinder Rana v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : July 02, 2026 SURINDER RANA -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. Neeraj Januha, Advocate, (Through V.C.) for Mr. R.P. Daaria, Advocate for the petitioner.

Dr. Neha Awasthi, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 16.07.2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Karnal, whereby Arms Licence No.476/DM/KL issued in his favour was cancelled in exercise of powers under Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959. The petitioner also impugns the order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Karnal Division, Karnal, whereby the appeal preferred against the said order was dismissed.

2.

Assailing the legality and validity of the impugned orders, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that not even a single criminal case has ever been registered against the petitioner. In support of this submission, reliance is placed upon the statement of PW-3 Sushil Kumar (Annexure P-6), who is the complainant in FIR No.247 dated 03.09.2023 registered against the petitioner's son, to contend that the said witness did not level any allegation against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the

petitioner never misused his licensed firearm and it was his son who uploaded photographs with the firearm on social media. Consequently, it is argued that the petitioner cannot be fastened with liability for the acts of his son.

3.

No other submission has been advanced on behalf of the petitioner.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and upon a studied survey of the record, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition. The reason for drawing this inference stems from the report of the Superintendent of Police, Karnal, which reveals that serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner's son, namely Lakshya, of brandishing illegal weapon to create terror in the locality, and of pointing a revolver at the temple of one Akash during a village fair, culminating in the registration of FIR No.236 dated 27.08.2023 under Sections 323, 324, 506 and 34 of the IPC at Police Station Nissing. Owing to his involvement in similar activities, another FIR No.247 dated 03.09.2023 under Sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, and Section 506 of the IPC, was also registered against him at the same police station.

During the course of investigation in the said case, a .32 bore revolver bearing No. FG-20594 was recovered from the licensee/present petitioner, whereupon Section 30 of the Arms Act was added to the FIR. In addition, FIR No.136 dated 19.05.2023 under Sections 148, 149, 323 and 506 IPC also stands registered against the petitioner's son at Police Station Nissing. Therefore, the petitioner's licensed firearm was reported to have been misused.

5.

The contention that no criminal case has been registered against

the petitioner does not advance his case. The material on record clearly demonstrates that the petitioner's licensed firearm was misused by his son and the petitioner facilitated such misuse. Having regard to the need to prevent recurrence of untoward incidents and in the public interest, the District Magistrate was justified in cancelling the arms licence of the petitioner by invoking the relevant provisions of the Arms Act. 6.

In summa, the instant writ petition is dismissed, being devoid of merit.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) July 02, 2026 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No