Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31560 (RAJ)

JORMAL v. STATE OF RAJ

CW/6718/2015 · 2025-03-11

Sudesh Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:11216] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6718/2015 Jormal S/o Raheem Khan, Chirkhana, Tehsil And District Alwar Raj.. ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan Through District Collector, Alwar ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. SP Singh for Mr. GS Gill, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 11/03/2025 1. Heard counsel for both parties and perused the record. 2. The District Collector and District Magistrate, Alwar vide order dated 16.04.2008, declined to renew the Arms License of petitioner for .12 bor Double Barrel Gun No.15106-65 and the appeal filed thereagainst by the petitioner has also been dismissed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur Division vide judgment dated 28.03.2012. Both the orders have been challenged by the petitioner, by means of filing instant writ petition on 02.05.2015 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The instant writ petition has been filed after a delay of three years. 3. The Arms License of petitioner was declined to be renewed on account of involvement of petitioner in a Criminal Case No.23/292/2007, which according to petitioner has been decided vide judgment dated 23.11.2007 (Ann-2) and was exonerated for [2025:RJ-JP:11216] (2 of 2) [CW-6718/2015] offences under Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC on ground of settlement, but petitioner was held guilty for offence under Section 147 of the IPC. 4. Counsel for petitioner, placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench in case of State & Ors. Vs. Sahab Ram [2011 WLC (Raj.) UC 230], submits that the involvement of petitioner in petty offences, is no ground to deny the renewal of Arms License, moreso, when it is not the case of defendants that the Arm was misused by the petitioner. 5. Having argued the writ petition for some time, since much time has passed on after denial for renewal of the Arms License, counsel for petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh application for issuance of Arms License where the parameters are as much as similar to the parameters for grant of renewal of Arms License. 6. In view of above, instead of intereference with the impugned order, instant writ petition is disposed of with the liberty as prayed for. However, it is hereby observed that in case, petitioner applies afresh for issuance of an Arms License, application be considered and decided in accordance with law and same may not be declined merely on the basis of judgment dated 23.11.2007 passed in Criminal Case No.23/292/07, which pertains to the petty nature of offences. 7. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/203-S