In CWP No. 7978 of 2022-PUNJ HC-  P&H HC sets aside order refusing renewal of arms licence as impugned order was bereft of reasons

Justice Avneesh Jhingan [30-05-2023]

Read Order: Pradeep Kumar vs. State of Haryana 

Tulip Kanth

Chandigarh, June 1, 2023:  While reiterating that quasi judicial order should contain reasons supporting the conclusion arrived at and the same have to be communicated to the affected party, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed a writ petition seeking quashing of orders refusing renewal of the arms licence.

The  arms licence issued to the petitioner for N.P.B. .32 bore pistol was valid from April 9, 2015 to April 9, 2018. The petitioner applied for renewal of the licence on March 22, 2018. A notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why he had not disclosed his conviction in registered under Section 68 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. 

The petitioner responded to the show cause notice taking a stand that he is an illiterate person and the omission of imposition of fine of Rs.500 and his release on probation in FIR case was unintentional. The application for renewal was rejected. The appeal against rejection was dismissed. Hence the present petition

Referring to Section 15 of the Arms Act, 1959, the Bench stated that Section 15(1) of the Act provides that the licence issued shall be in force for five years unless revoked earlier. Under the first proviso, the licence can be granted for a shorter period. Second proviso provides that after every five years the licensee had to produce the licence along with fire arm or ammunition and connected documents before the licensing authority. 

Further that the licence shall be subject to the conditions stipulated in Section 9(1)(a)(ii) and (iii) of the Act. Under sub-section (2), the license issued shall remain in force from the date on which it is granted till the period determined by the licensing authority, the exception being where the licence is revoked earlier. Sub-section (3) stipulates that the licence shall be renewable for a period it was originally granted except for the cases where the licensing authority for reasons to be recorded in writing decides otherwise. Further the provisions of Sections 13 and 14 of the Act shall apply for renewal of the licence as they apply to the grant thereof,the Bench added. 

The impugned order passed by the licensing authority is bereft of reasons and is in violation of Section 15(3) of the Act, the Bench held while also noitgn that the reply filed by the petitioner and the averments made were brushed aside by recording that the licensing authority was not satisfied. 

It was noted that the stand taken by the petitioner for omission of information vis-a-vis the FIR was not considered. No reasons have been recorded for bringing the case within the ambit of Sections 13 and 14 of the Act. 

Thus,the impugned orders being violative of the principles of natural justice were set aside.