IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.871 of 2011 SATRUGHAN SINGH VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE EKAWANA, POLICE STATION BARHARA, BHOJPUR AT ARRAH. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COMMISSIONER, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BHOJPUR AT ARRAH 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BHOJPUR AT ARRAH. ----------- 2 08.07.2011. The petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 19.5.2003, passed in Crim Misc. no. 16 of 1997 by the Collector, Bhojpur cancelling his Gun & Rifle license. The petitioner is also aggrieved by order dated 13.7.2007, passed by the Commissioner in Appeal case no. 37 of 2003, dismissing the appeal preferred against order of the Collector, Bhojpur. The petitioner states that his Arms license has been cancelled due to institution of a criminal case in the year 1996 being Barhara Police Station Case No. 74 of 1996 u/s 307 Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner submits that the authorities did not take into consideration that there was a case and counter case and no one was injured in the alleged firing opened by the petitioner. Moreover, the trial ended in acquittal though on compromise in the year 2002. He further submits that the petitioner had unblemished career in Military service spanning over 28 years and he 2 is recipient of the President award. It is also the case of the petitioner that no untoward incident has been reported against him since 1996 January. He submits that as per FIR, firing was made to disperse the crowd who were interfering with his possession. He submits that during the China war in 1962 he was put behind bar for 47 days. It appears that the license has been cancelled mainly on the ground that the petitioner opened fire in the year 1996. It is not in dispute that petitioner opened fire in the air. It further appears that he has to his credit unblemished Military service for 28 years and recipient of President award and has not been involved in any other case after 1996. Considering these aspects, I observe that if the petitioner files a fresh representation before the Licensing authority for revocation of Arms licence, the same may be considered on its own merit. The Licensing authority may seek fresh report whether in the last 16 years his conduct has been good. With the aforesaid direction this writ petition is disposed of. 3 Annexures 7 & 9 would not come in the way of fresh consideration on the issue by the licensing authority. Shashi ( S.P. Singh, J.)