Ranveer Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 31 July, 2026

    0
    13
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Ranveer Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 31 July, 2026

    Author: Ajit Kumar

    Bench: Ajit Kumar

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2714 of 2025
                     ======================================================
                     Ranveer Kumar S/o Ranvijay Singh R/o-Vil and Post-Nuruddinpur (803202),
                     P.S.-Khushrupur Dist.- Patna, Bihar.
    
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
               1.    The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna-
                     800001.
               2.    The District Magistrate, Patna, PIn-800001, Bihar.
               3.    The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, Pin-800001, Bihar.
               4.    The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Fatuha, Patna-803201, Bihar.
               5.    The Sub Divisional Officer, Patna City, Patna-800001, Bihar.
               6.    The Station House Officer, Khushrupur, Patna- 803202, Bihar.
               7.    The Circle Officer, Khushrupur, Patna-803202, Patna.
    
                                                               ... ... Respondent/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s   :        Mr.Abhinav Kumar Singh, Advocate
                     For the Respondent/s   :        Mrs. Binita Singh, SC (28)
                                                     Mr. Abhinav Kumar Singh, Advocate
                                                     Mr. Ankur Apurv Singh, Advocate
    
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    3   31-07-2026

    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

    Standing Counsel-28 for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the

    following relief(s):-

    (i) For issuance of writ in the
    nature of Mandamus for commanding and
    directing the concerned respondent i.e.
    responded number 02 and 03 to act in
    accordance with Section 13 and 14 of the
    Arms Act, 1959 andRule 13 and 14 of Arms
    Rule, 2016.

    (ii) For issuance of Writ in the
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    2/11

    nature of Mandamus to direct the
    Respondent No. – 02 to reconsider and Arms
    Case No.- IX-165 of 2021 which was
    arbitrarily discharged in haste and
    vengeance.

    (iii) For issuance of Writ in the
    nature of Certiorari for quashing and setting
    aside the effect of order dt.- 08/08/2023
    passed in Arms Case No.- IX-165 of 2021 by
    Respondent No.- 02 and directing him to
    grant the same.

    (iv) Issuance of Writ in the nature
    of Certiorari for quashing and setting aside
    the effect of order dt.- 22/10/2024 passed in
    Arms Appeal No.- 204 of 2024 and direct
    Respondent No. – 02 to grant the same.

    (v) For issuance of Writ in the
    nature of Mandamus to direct the
    Respondent No. 2 to grant the Arms License
    to the petitioner for the safety of the life and
    property.

    (vi) For issuance of the Writ in the
    nature of Mandamus for imposing coast over
    the respondent no.- 02 for allegedly
    violating and misusing the powers conferred
    under Section 13 and 14 of the Arms Act,
    1959 and Rule 13 and 14 of Arms Rule, 2016
    and directions issued under Sub-Clause (C)
    of Clause (ii) of Circular Number V-

    11016/16/2009-Arms, Ministry of Home
    Affairs (IS-II Division/Arms Section) AND
    Clause (V) of Circular Number –

    11026/16/2009-Arms, Government of
    India,Ministry of Home Affairs (IS-II
    Division/Arms Section), which leads to the
    wastage of petitioner’s precious time and
    also cause mental and physical agony.

    (vii) For issuance of Writ in the
    nature of Mandamus directing the
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    3/11

    respondents and the State of Bihar to
    properly follow and comply with the
    directions laid down under Section 13 and
    14 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Rule 13 and 14
    of Arms Rule, 2016 and directions issued
    under Sub-Clause (C) of Clause (ii) of
    Circular Number V-11016/16/2009-Arms,
    Ministry of Home Affairs IS-ll Division/Arms
    Section) AND Clause (V) of Circular
    Number – 11026/16/2009-Arms, Government
    of India, Ministry of Home Affairs (IS-II
    Division/Arms Section).

    (viii) For any other relief /reliefs
    for which petitioner is entitled for.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

    reasons for rejection which has been incorporated in the order

    impugned dated 08.08.2023 in Misc. Arms Case No.

    IX165/2021 passed by District Magistrate, Patna, goes to show

    that the District Magistrate, Patna, while referring to the

    provisions under Arms Act, 1959, Section 13(3) (b) and Section

    14(1) (b) (ii), under which the Licensing Authorities have been

    empowered to refuse to grant a license on satisfaction, where it

    transpires to the authorities that for security of the public peace

    or for public safety, the same can be refused. It has next been

    submitted that the petitioner’s application for obtaining license

    has been rejected by the authorities by referring the Khushrupur

    P.S. Case No. 213 of 2019, which do not show any active

    participation, prudent materials indicating any definite proof of
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    4/11

    showing threat to the Pubic peace and safety in refusing to grant

    license. Upon being aggrieved by the order of rejection, for

    grant of Arms, the petitioner preferred writ petition before this

    Hon’ble Court vide CWJC No. 17939 of 2023, wherein this

    Hon’ble Court, vide order dated 17.05.2024, directed the

    petitioner to file an appeal/ appropriate application before the

    Commissioner, Patna Division. Consequently, on 29.07.2024,

    the petitioner filed Arms Appeal No. 204 of 2024, before the

    Commissioner, Patna Division. However, the learned authority,

    vide impugned order dated 22.10.2024, straight away dismissed

    the appeal ignoring the grounds contemplated under Section 13

    of the Arms Act, and rejected the same merely on two grounds,

    namely: (i) that the petitioner has no security threat, and (ii) that

    the Superintendent of Police had only forwarded the report. It is

    pertinent to mention that this Hon’ble Court, in CWJC No. 4117

    of 2020, vide judgment / order dated 27.11.2024, has

    categorically held that “Arms Licence cannot be denied solely

    on the ground that the applicant does not have any specific

    security threat or imminent danger.”

    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to

    the provisions of Section 13(3) (b) of the Arms Act, 1959

    submits that the Licensing authority is provided with statutory
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    5/11

    duty to grant license under Section 3 in any other case or a

    license under Section 4, Section 5, Section 6, Section 10 or

    Section 12, if the licensing authority is satisfied that the person

    by whom the license is required has a good reason for obtaining

    the same. Though, the provisions of Section13(3) (b) which

    enables the licensing authority to consider the case of the

    applicant for grant of license in the contingencies indicated

    under the said provision, still, for no prudent reason, has refused

    to exercise the powers to grant license ignoring the materials

    available on record that the petitioner is possessing a huge

    chunk of land located in marketed area and on highway and

    people with criminal background frequently try to encroach the

    same and this fact has not been controverted by the local police

    and, as also, character of the petitioner having been examined

    by the local police, and same having not been found to be

    negative and there being nothing contrary in the police record,

    the local police having recommended for such grant of license

    not been appreciated by the licensing authority, deserves to be

    interfered with in order to enable the petitioner, who seeks such

    license for his personal safety. The issues of grant of Arms

    License to the applicant after examining the occupation and the

    nature of threat of the persons has been approved by the Hon’ble
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    6/11

    Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 758 of 2018

    wherein the following proposition has been carved out:-

    “The order of the District
    Magistrate, as communicated, does not
    indicate the existence of any valid reason,
    but, at the same time, the order in appeal
    passed by the Commissioner indicates that
    there was no mention of any specific security
    threat or danger to the appellant in the
    police report. Such a ground, in our opinion,
    would be contrary to the intent of grant of
    license inasmuch as it is not necessary that a
    person should have an actual threat or
    imminent threat perception, but it would
    suffice if the applicant is able to persuade
    the authority to take into consideration the
    nature of his trade, profession and calling
    for the purpose of grant of license which
    situation has now been taken care of under
    Sub-Rule (3)(a) of Rule 12 of the 2016 Rules.
    In this view of the matter, the question of
    grant or refusal of license will have to be
    revisited by the licensing authority where the
    licensing authority will have the power to
    make an assessment as per the aforesaid
    Rules, keeping in view the police report or
    such other factors which may be necessary
    for the said purpose.”

    5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents

    endorsed the decision taken by the District Magistrate, Patna

    submitting that it is the subjective satisfaction of the licensing

    authorities in granting license or in refusing the same on

    his/her/their personal satisfaction, where the security of public
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    7/11

    peace and for public safety, such decisions are required to be

    taken by them.

    6. Upon perusal of the records, this Court finds that

    since there is already a report of local police wherein the

    petitioner having a huge chunk of land located in market area

    and on highways and people with criminal background

    frequently trying to assault and encroach the property have

    already been disclosed and such aspect having not been dealt

    with, by the licensing authorities in their orders, and even from

    the Appellate Order, it does not appear that the appellate

    authorities have considered such issues with regard to the

    petitioner’s entitlement for grant of license and for better

    appreciation, at this stage, it would be appropriate to refer to the

    provision of Section 14 of the Arms Act which reads as under:

    14. Refusal of licences.-

    (1) Notwithstanding anything in section 13,
    licensing authority shall refuse to grant-

    (a) a licence under section 3, section 4
    or section 5 where such licence is
    required in respect of any prohibited
    arms or prohibited ammunition;

    (b) a licence in any other case under
    Chapter II-

    (i) where such licence is
    required by a person whom the
    licensing authority has reason
    to believe-

    (1) to be prohibited by
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    8/11

    this Actor by any other
    law for the time being in
    force from acquiring,
    having in his possession
    or carrying any arms or
    ammunition, or
    (2) to be of unsound
    mind, or
    (3) to be for any reason
    unfit for a licence under
    this Act; or

    (ii) where the licensing
    authority deems it necessary for
    the security of the public peace
    or for public safety to refuse to
    grant such licence.

    (2) The licensing authority shall not refuse
    to grant any licence to any person merely on
    the ground that such person does not own or
    possess sufficient property.
    (3) Where the licensing authority refuses to
    grant a licence to any person it shall record
    in writing the reasons for such refusal and
    furnish to that person on demand a brief
    statement of the same unless in any case the
    licensing authority is of the opinion that it
    will not be in the public interest to furnish
    such statement.

    7. Taking into account the above facts and

    circumstances, submissions of the parties and as also to

    provision of section 14 of the Arms Act, it is evident that the

    District Magistrate, while rejecting the application of the

    petitioner and, as also, by the Appellate Authority, while dealing

    with the appeal of the petitioner, has passed the orders being
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    9/11

    oblivious to the provisions of Section-14 of the Arms Act, which

    pertains to the refusal of the license only in the case of, where

    the security of Public Peace and Public Safety is found to be

    compromised. It is not the case of the State authorities that the

    petitioner has been found not worthy of the license on the

    grounds mentioned under Section 14 of the Arms Act. The

    grounds, as mentioned in the impugned orders, do not in any

    manner, indicate that the petitioner is not entitled for the arms

    license and owing to the same, he has been treated to be unfit

    for the license under the Arms Act.

    8. The words “public peace” or “public safety” do not

    mean ordinary disturbance of law and order. Public safety

    means safety of the public at large and not safety of a few

    persons only. In such circumstances, a blanket or mechanical

    denial of arms license on vague apprehension of public safety

    without any empirical data and contrary to the two police

    reports would not only be contrary to the statutory scheme but

    would also fail to give due weight to an individual statutory

    rights. Though the right to carry firearms cannot be directly read

    into Article 21, consideration of public safety, security and

    reasonable apprehension must meaningfully inform the decision

    making process of the licensing authority.

    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    10/11

    9. In view of the aforesaid consideration, this Court

    sets aside both the orders i.e., order dated 22.10.2024 passed in

    Arms Appeal No. 204 of 2024 by the Divisional Commissioner,

    Patna as well as the order dated 08.08.2023 passed in Memo No.

    2786 dated 08.08.2023 by the District Magistrate, Patna.

    10. Consequently, the District Arms Magistrate, Patna,

    is directed to adjudicate the claim of the petitioner for grant of

    license on the basis of earlier application filed by this petitioner,

    and in case, any new format of application having been

    introduced for making/seeking request for grant of license by

    the applicant, in such event, the petitioner would be

    appropriately communicated to carry out the formalities for

    filling up such application and, in case, there is no such change,

    in such event, the petitioner’s application for grant of license

    shall be adjudicated within a period of six weeks from filing of a

    representation by the petitioner before the authorities concerned.

    11. It goes without saying that all these issues which

    has been raised by this petitioner and the report which has been

    submitted by the local police placed for consideration before the

    District Magistrate through Superintendent of Police needs to be

    considered strictly in consonance with the purport of the

    legislation and on being satisfied, the District Magistrate is
    Patna High Court CWJC No.2714 of 2025(3) dt.31-07-2026
    11/11

    required to act in accordance with law.

    12. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

    (Ajit Kumar, J)
    surya/-

    U



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here