IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1777 of 2008 MD.SHAHID HUSSAIN @ SHAHID HUSSAIN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 05. 17-07-2008 Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.5.2007 contained in Annexure-7 by which the District Magistrate, Munger has ordered seizure of two arms of the petitioner by virtue of the two licences which he holds. Petitioner raises non-application of mind on behalf of the authorities before passing of the order in question. His contention is that way back in the year 2000 a local police officer forcibly seized his double barrel gun without any legal proceeding empowering him to do so. The petitioner made his efforts therefore to obtain the said gun back. This fact now is not denied that a seizure was effected, may be illegally but luckily for the petitioner the gun is still in existence. It seems his persistence and insistence on the matter, may be belated, instigated somebody to lodge a criminal case against him as is being alleged. An FIR has been instituted which is Kotwali P S Case No. 320 of 2006 under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. This institution of a case has, therefore, been made the basis for directing the petitioner to surrender his rifle too. Some aspects are not seriously contested in the counter affidavit but the fact that petitioner has lost his double barrel gun in the illegal seizure by then is not disputed. If that is so, then the Court has no hesitation in holding that the petitioner should be returned his double barrel gun which has been under illegal custody of the respondent State. The Court may have had an occasion to even - 2 - comment on the way power is being exercised by certain authorities despite the fact that we profess this country to be a country governed by rule of law. The Court drops the matter at this stage for many a reasons and also does not want to take cognizance of all these matters since the writ application is being disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to first avail the statutory remedy of appeal. Respondents are directed to return the double barrel gun lying in their custody to the petitioner. Petitioner is given liberty to file appeal against the order contained in Annexure-7. His contention is that mere institution of the criminal case of the nature of allegation may not be enough for sustaining this order but then this submission should be made in the appeal. The appellate authority, on filing of the appeal, after hearing the petitioner and perusing his memo of appeal will pass order within three months. The writ application is disposed of with the above directions. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)