Court No. - 19
Reserved on 15.12.2021 Delivered on 17.12.2021
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2713 of 2019 Petitioner :- Sandeep Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Datta Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Piyush Shukla
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Firearm licence of petitioner was cancelled by impugned order dated 09.04.2012 on the ground that two criminal cases being Case Crime No. 253 of 2012, under Sections 143, 448, 153A IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Case Crime No. 254 of 2012, under Sections 147, 148, 353, 336, 504, 506 IPC were pending against petitioner and that petitioner used to extend threat by showing his licensed firearm on public at large and, therefore, there was every likelihood that licensed firearm may be misused and it was found deem necessary for security of public peace and public order to cancel the firearm licence of petitioner.
2. Sri Krishna Dutt Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner, submits that in aforesaid criminal cases First Information Report was lodged against number of persons. There was no allegation of misuse of licensed firearm by petitioner. The petitioner belongs to a very reputed family and First Information Reports were lodged against petitioner only due to village partibandi. Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that merely due to pendency of criminal case a firearm licence cannot be cancelled particularly when there is no allegation of misuse of firearm and there is no allegation of disturbance of public peace and public order.
3. The aforesaid submissions are opposed by Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents, who submits that in the present case petitioner was a part of an unlawful assembly who armed with lathi, danda and brick entered into the premises of a school and tried to install a statue of a prominent leader without any authority or 2 permission and when the unlawful assembly was warned by police, they attacked on police party, which created disturbance in public peace and public order. There were violation of Section 144 Cr.P.C. also. Therefore, there was substantial material before Licensing Authority that petitioner was involved in an offence of disturbance of public peace and public order.
4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available on record.
5. From perusal of contents of First Information Report lodged against petitioner and other persons, it is evident that petitioner was a part of an unlawful assembly who indulged in unlawful activities and attacked on police party, which created disturbance in public peace and public order. Therefore, the Licensing Authority has substantial material that petitioner was involved in cases where there was disturbance of public peace and public order and as such it was found deem necessary for security of public peace to cancel the firearm licence of petitioner. It is not a case of apprehension of disturbance of public security and public order at the instance of petitioner but it is a case where there are allegations specifically mentioned in the First Information Reports that petitioner alongwith other persons was indulged in unlawful activities and attacked the police party which created disturbance in public order. Therefore, there were sufficient material with Licensing Authority to cancel the firearm licence of petitioner.
6. In view of above, the writ petition lacks merit. Dismissed accordingly.
7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :-17.12.2021 AK