Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19865 (JHR)

SHESH MANI PANDEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, JAIL AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT

WPC/5446/2025 · 2026-07-09

Sri Ananda Sen

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:20321 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(C) No.5446 of 2025 ----- Shesh Mani Pandey, Aged about 54 years, Son of Late Ram Narayan Pandey, Resident of MLA Road, Gandhinagar, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda. … Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, Department of Home, Jail and Disaster Management, 2nd Floor, Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, through the Additional Chief Secretary. 2. The Divisional Commissioner, SanthalPargana Division, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 3. The Deputy Commissioner-cum- District Magistrate, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda. 5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda. 6. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda, District Godda. … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tiwari, SC-I …...... 04 /09.07.2026: I.A. No. 16417 of 2025 This interlocutory application has been filed for amendment in the writ petition. 2. In the writ petition grievance of the petitioner was that his application for arms license was kept pending and not disposed of. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that now the application has been dismissed by a reasoned order. The petitioner thus wants to amend the writ petition to challenge the order of rejection. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer and submits that the order of rejection is appealable in terms of section 18 of the Arms Act as any order passed by the District Magistrate is appealable andthe appeal lies before the Commissioner of the Division. 2026:JHHC:20321 2 5. Considering the said submission that the impugned order rejecting the license of the petitioner is appealable, I am not inclined to entertain this interlocutory application, thus, this interlocutory application is dismissed. 6. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority. 7. If any appeal is filed, the same will be considered on its own merits by passing a reasoned order which will be communicated to the petitioner. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 09.07.2026 Tanuj/CP-2 Uploaded on 13.07.2026