- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.100745 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. RAJU AMBORE S/O. SHANKARARAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. MARATHA COLONY, DHARWAD, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-08. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARANABASAVARAJ C., ADVOCATE AND SRI. KUSHAL KAMBLE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, HUBLI-DHARWAD, NAVANAGAR, HUBLI, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-25. 2. THE SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH-580011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT, DATED:21.11.2025 BEARING NO.CP/MAG- 1/ARMS/205/2025, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A. B. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO RENEW THE ARM/GUN LICENCE OF THE PETITIONER BY THE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE- D, DATED 08.08.2025 AND ACCORDINGLY RENEW THE ARM GUN OF THE PETITIONER FOR A PERIOD OF 5 YEARS; C. ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION DEEMED FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THIS CASE IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2026.02.18 10:45:02 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “a. Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari, quashing the Impugned Endorsement, Dated: 21.11.2025 bearing No.CP/MAG- 1/ARMS/205/2025, issued by the 1st Respondent vide ANNEXURE-A. b. Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to Renew the Arm/Gun Licence of the Petitioner by the considering the application submitted by the Petitioner vide Annexure-D, dated 08.08.2025 and accordingly renew the Arm Gun of the Petitioner for a period of 5 years; C. Issue any other writ order or direction deemed fit in the circumstance of this case in interest of justice and equity.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that, he is a resident of Dharwad District and is residing in the same address from more than 20 years. He is an Agriculturist and was an Ex-Corporator of Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation. Considering the threat the petitioner is having, he had applied for the arms licence and the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 licence was granted on 11.03.2008 and from time to time the said licence is renewed and the licence was valid till 31.08.2025. Then for renewal of the licence, after following the procedure, he has offered the renewal from the respondent No.1. Pursuant thereto, the police authorities have conducted the enquiry and antecedents’ verification and respondent No.2 submitted a proposal to respondent No.1 for renewal of the arms licence of the petitioner. Respondent No.1 by the endorsement impugned has rejected the renewal of arms licence of the petitioner on the ground that he has attained the age of 60 years and as such, he has no life threat. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the said observation of the respondent No.1 is without any material and without any basis. When a thorough inquiry is conducted by the respondent No.2 and when a report is placed before the respondent No.1, the respondent No.1 ought to have considered the same and ought to have given a reason for not renewing the arms licence of the petitioner. It is contrary to Section 14 of the Arms Act, 1959 (for short, ‘the Act’). It is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 submitted that the endorsement impugned needs to be set- aside. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents/Police submits that, as there is no life threat to the petitioner, the respondent No.1 has rightly rejected the renewal of arms licence and it is a well considered order. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA, perused the material on record. The grant and renewal of the arms licence is as per Section 14 of the Arms Act, 1959. Section 14 of the Arms Act reads thus: “14. Refusal of licences.―(1) Notwithstanding anything in section 13, the 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 this Act or 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 (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.” 6. Whenever an Authority as per the powers vested under the Act is passing an order or considering the request, he has to give the reasons and without any reason, just like that, the respondent No.1 ought not to have observed that there is no threat to the petitioner. Basing on what material, he has come to the conclusion that there is no threat to the petitioner is not forthcoming. Whenever an order is passed by the Competent Authority under the Arms Act rejecting the renewal of arms licence, the same should contain the reasons. This Court in several cases is coming across the orders passed by the Commissioner/Competent Authority in renewal of the gun licences, where in one line the finding is given and there is no - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 mentioning about how the Authority has come to such a conclusion. Hereafter, whenever an order is passed rejecting the renewal of arms licence, that should contain specific reasons. 7. Coming to the facts of this case, the endorsement impugned is bereft of reasons and the same needs to be set-aside. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed of setting aside the endorsement dated 21.11.2025 bearing No. CP/ MAG-1/ ARMS/ 205/ 2025 issued by the respondent No.1. (ii) The respondent No.1 should pass a reasoned order while considering the application of the petitioner for renewal. (iii) The copy of this order shall be circulated to the Principal Secretary (Home), Government of Karnataka, in turn, he shall instruct all the concerned officials/officers to pass a reasoned order whenever an application is filed seeking renewal of the arms licence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2168 WP No. 100745 of 2026 (iv) Registrar (Judicial) is directed to communicate this order. (v) All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI RH CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7