CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2610 OF 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: August 03, 2009. Parties Name Tarsem Singh ..PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Sarju Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Sharma, Addl. A.G., Punjab; JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ of certiorari to quash order dated October 21, 2005 (P-6), vide which Arms Licence issued to the petitioner was cancelled. Further challenge is to the order dated November 29, 2006 (P-8), vide which appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Counsel for the parties heard. Perusal of orders, mentioned above, indicate that on receipt of a complaint from respondent No. 4, some enquiry was got conducted by the CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2610 OF 2007 -2- District Magistrate, Nawanshahr, regarding allegations levelled in that complaint, wherein it was stated that the petitioner is in the habit of scaring children of the complainant by showing them his weapons. Taking note of the enquiry report and also a fact that the petitioner is named as a party in proceedings under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C., arms licence was cancelled by observing as under: “The licencee was issued a show cause notice vide letter No. 489/A.L.A dated 5.9.2005. In reply it is stated that a false complaint has been made. Personal hearing was given. After perusing the documents on the file, I have come to the conclusion that possession of arms by the applicant is not in public interest. Therefore, in order to maintain peace and order and prevent any untoward incident, I, Krishan Kumar, IAS, District Magistrate, Nawanshahr, while exercising powers u/S 17 of the Arms Act, 1959, cancel the arms licence No. 6076/Gun/DM/Jalandhar 88 by District Magistrate, Jalandhar and 91 OD/98 of this office and forfeit the arms.” Petitioner went in appeal. After noting arguments of both the parties at length, without discussing anything, the appellate authority in its decision observed that the order, passed by the District Magistrate, deserves to be maintained. The appellate authority also took note of the enquiry report, made regarding complaint filed by respondent No. 4. Perusal of paper book indicates that the arms licence was granted to the petitioner in the year 1988. It was renewed in the year 1998. Prior to the filing of the complaint in question, there was no allegation CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2610 OF 2007 -3- against the petitioner that he had ever misused the arms licence in question. It is apparent from the record that against the respondent No. 4 (complainant) and respondent No. 5 (her husband), respondents No. 6 and 7, FIR No. 213 was recorded on July 28, 2005, under Sections 323/325/34 IPC at the instance of Manjit Kaur, who was none other than daughter of the petitioner. It appears that when named as an accused in the above said FIR, respondent No. 4 moved a complaint stating that the petitioner had been threatening her children by showing them his weapons. This Court feels that the facts were not discussed, by the authorities below, in correct perspective. Once it has come on record that Tarsem Kaur, complainant was an accused in the FIR, which was recorded at the instance of daughter of the petitioner, it could have been presumed that she might have made the complaint to settle scores with the petitioner. The tone and tenor of the order, passed by the District Magistrate, shows that recording of FIR against the complainant was virtually taken as an instance, to cancel licence issued to the petitioner. There is no allegation against the petitioner that he had used the weapon at the time of alleged occurrence. Both the orders passed are totally non-speaking one and cannot be sustained. A Single Bench of this Court in Mukhtiar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1997(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 95, has held that pendency of some case is no ground to cancel arms licence of an individual unless it is proved that the licence holder has incurred any disqualification under Section 17 of the Arms Act, 1959. It has also come on record that proceedings under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. were initiated after registration of the FIR, which was recorded at the instance of the daughter of the petitioner. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2610 OF 2007 -4- In view of above, impugned orders are set aside and directions are issued to the District Magistrate NawanShahr to restore arms licence issued to the petitioner. August 03, 2009 ( Jasbir Singh ) DKC Judge