IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15795 of 2009 SUSHIL RAI @ SUSHIL KR.RAI S/O PULKIT RAI R/V- NAYAGOWN, P.S-PARBATTA, DISTT- KHAGARIA …PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KHAGARIA 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KHAGARIA ………RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : M/s Mukesh Kumar No.3 and Ashok Kumar Pathak, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, AC to AAG-4 ----------- 02/ 05.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and its authorities. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 22.02.2006 by which the District Magistrate, Khagaria directed the petitioner’s licence to remain suspended till the disposal of the criminal case bearing Parbatta P.S. Case No.25 of 2003 in which the petitioner is one of the accused for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code as well as section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that according to section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959 an appeal is provided against such an order and hence against the impugned order passed by the District Magistrate the petitioner should have filed an appeal before the Commissioner of the Division. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition with a liberty to file a statutory appeal before the 2 Commissioner of the Division. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. However, if the petitioner files the aforesaid appeal within fifteen days from today along with a copy of this order as well as an interlocutory application for condoning the delay, the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to pendency of this writ petition and shall decide the appeal on merit in accordance with law, expeditiously. harish/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )