CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.9614 OF 2008. ____ Against the order dated 19.11.2007 passed in Arms Appeal No. 260 of 2007 by the learned Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra. - - --- BHAGWAN KESHWAR s/o Mundrika Singh, resident of village- Majalishpur, P.S. Kopa, District- Saran. .... .....Petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner Saran Division , Chapra. 2. The Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra 3. The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra. ..........Respondents ----------- For The Petitioner : MR.RABI BHUSHAN PRASAD 1 For The Respondent :SC-6 P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH Navaniti Pd.Singh,J:- Petitioner is a retired defence personnel, who, during his service career itself, has obtained an arms license of DBBL. His arms license has been cancelled by the Collector, which order has not been interfered by the Divisional Commissioner and hence this writ petition has been filed. The ground on which arms license has been cancelled is two folds. Petitioner was a member of Barat party in which there was a firing, one person died on the spot and another was grievously injured. When police reached they found petitioner there with a gun. There were other persons there with guns. On smell of the barrel it was alleged that the petitioner had used the gun in public place. On demand he could not produce the licnence.The Collector held that using of gun in public place and moving with gun without carrying license were both - 2 - violation of the Arms Act and the rules framed therein as well as the terms of the licence and as such he cancelled the license. This was not interfered by the Commissioner. Petitioner does not dispute that he was found with a gun at the Barat Party where shooting had taken place and a person died and, another grievously injured. He denied having used the gun. He denied having not produced the license, for he submits that license having been produced, police personnel asked him to deposit the same in the morning in the Thana but did not mention this fact. Both of these questions are questions of fact which are concluded by the two authorities i.e. the Licensing Authority- District Magistrate and the appellate authority- Divisional Commissioner. This Court does not sit in appeal over the question of fact. If that be so, there is no merit in this case and it is accordingly dismissed. Patna High Court, 8th April, 2010, S.Singh(NAFR) (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)