DM order denying arms licence to sportsperson set aside by HC
Gaurav Gupta
, who had required it for training and competition purpose.
In the decision dated Jun 2, Justice Piyush Agrawal also remanded the matter to Deoria district magistrate, for deciding afresh application of the petitioner for grant of arm licence for sports training and competitions by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner to cure the defect, if any, as well as to provide all documentary evidence/material, as required under the aforesaid rules, within a period of 15 days from date of production of certified copy of the order.
Through the present writ petition, the petitioner, a sportsman, assailed the order dated May 3, passed by Deoria district magistrate, whereby his application for arms licence was rejected.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance to the order dated Feb 27 of this court, the licensing authority had rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of arm licence by holding some defects in the sports certificate attached by him.
The certificate has been issued to the petitioner as a junior shooter and since the petitioner's category of shooting was not defined well and no affidavit with regard to the same had been filed, as per Arms Rules, 2016, the arms licence to the petitioner could not be granted.
Counsel for petitioner further submitted that with regard to the said defect, if any, no opportunity was given to the petitioner to cure the same.
He further submitted that since the petitioner had to participate in the upcoming pre-Uttar Pradesh state shooting championship competition, to be held in beginning of July, the petitioner shall be disqualified from participating in absence of a fire-arm licence. He also stated that the above said ground on which the application of the petitioner had been rejected, could be cured.
On the other hand, state govt's counsel supported the DM's order, which was under challenge, submitting that since the petitioner had failed to provide necessary documentary evidence in support of his application, the application of the petitioner had rightly been rejected.
He submitted that in the said application for grant of arms licence, the petitioner had not disclosed details as required under the Arms Rules, 2016.
After hearing the parties, perusal of the said application showed that no column had been framed as per aforesaid rules as to the detailed information/evidence of the petitioner as a 'Junior Shooter'.
Further, the impugned order (the order under challenge) did not refer to any opportunity being granted to the petitioner to cure the defect as pointed out in the impugned order.
"In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as stated, the impugned order dated May 3, cannot be justified in the eyes of law and the same is hereby set aside," the court added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
12 hours ago
- Time of India
High court upholds 6-month jail term in cheque bounce case
Chennai: Noting that a borrower cannot evade repayment merely on the ground that the loan amount was unaccounted for in the lender's income tax returns, Madras high court upheld the conviction of a man in a cheque bounce case. Justice G K Ilanthiraiyan dismissed a revision petition filed by E Dhatchinamoorthy, who challenged his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The prosecution said, Dhatchinamoorthy borrowed 3 lakh from complainant S Seenuvasan and issued a cheque towards repayment. The cheque was returned dishonoured for 'funds insufficient'. Despite a statutory notice, he failed to repay. The Tindivanam judicial magistrate sentenced him to six months of simple imprisonment and directed him to pay compensation equal to the cheque amount. The conviction was later confirmed by the II additional district judge, Tindivanam, in appeal. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai | Gold Rates Today in Chennai | Silver Rates Today in Chennai Before the HC, the petitioner argued that the loan was not accounted for in the complainant's tax returns and hence could not be considered a legally enforceable debt. He also questioned the admissibility of a photocopy of the cheque marked before the trial court. The court noted that the borrower admitted to taking the money and issuing the cheque. "Whether the loan amount is accounted or not is not the concern of the borrower. Once the money is borrowed, it has to be repaid," Justice G K Ilanthiraiyan said. Holding that both the trial and appellate courts rightly convicted him, the HC said the conviction 'does not require any interference' and dismissed the revision. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
Mint
21 hours ago
- Mint
Delhi High Court's BIG ruling: Merely crying of woman cannot make out case of dowry harassment
The mere fact that a woman was crying cannot make a case of dowry harassment, said the Delhi High Court while dismissing a petition against the discharge of a husband and his family from charges of cruelty and dowry harassment. According to the prosecution, the woman, married in December 2010, faced harassment and dowry demands from her husband and in-laws. Her family claimed that they spent nearly ₹ 4 lakh on the wedding, alleging that later demands for a motorcycle, cash, and a gold bracelet were made by the husband and in-laws. The woman, a mother of two daughters, died on 31 March 2014. 'Statement of the sister of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she also stated that on the occasion of Holi, she had called her sister and found her crying. However, merely because the deceased was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment,' Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said. She also observed that the father of the woman neither mentioned specific incidents nor did he provide proof of giving money to the accused. 'Such bald assertions, in the given situation, cannot be held to be even making out a prima facie case of harassment,' the judge added. The trial court had discharged the accused noting that the death took place due to pneumonia, a natural cause. The high court also emphasised that the post-mortem report attributed the cause of death to pneumonia, not cruelty. 'In the present case, to bring in the clause of cruelty leading to the death of the woman, it may be noted that the deceased had died not because of any act of cruelty but for natural reasons... Therefore, Clause (a) to the Explanation annexed to Section 498A IPC is not attracted,' the Court said.
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
Woman Crying Doesn't 'Per Se' Prove Dowry Harassment: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that mere fact that a woman was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the observation while dismissing a petition against the discharge of a husband and his family from charges of cruelty and dowry harassment. According to the prosecution, the woman, married in December 2010, faced harassment and dowry demands from her husband and in-laws. Her family claimed that they spent nearly Rs 4 lakh on the wedding, alleging that later demands for a motorcycle, cash, and a gold bracelet were made by the husband and in-laws. The woman, a mother of two daughters, died on 31 March 2014. "Statement of the sister of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she also stated that on the occasion of Holi, she had called her sister and found her crying. However, merely because the deceased was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment," the high court said. The trial court had discharged the accused noting that the death took place due to pneumonia, a natural cause. The high court also emphasised that the post-mortem report attributed the cause of death to pneumonia, not cruelty. "In the present case, to bring in the clause of cruelty leading to the death of the woman, it may be noted that the deceased had died not because of any act of cruelty but for natural reasons... Therefore, Clause (a) to the Explanation annexed to Section 498A IPC is not attracted," the Court said. It also observed that the father of the woman neither mentioned specific incidents nor did he provide proof of giving money to the accused. "Such bald assertions, in the given situation, cannot be held to be even making out a prima facie case of harassment," the judge added.
