T.Ajith Singh Thakur v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: P NAVEEN RAO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-18. T.Ajith Singh Thakur v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) F R'| D A Y,#5 * if&'&'ilJ i,? S Y,i E,3.? " " PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P NAVEEN RAO wRtT PET|T|ON NO. 17795 0F 2020 Between: Singh Thakur, S/o. Jairaj Singh Thakur, Aged about 54 years, Occ: ]. 41th Business, R/o. H. No. 3-6-1 50, Krishna Punj Building, Himayathhagar, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, Hyderabad, Telangana. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Zone, Hyderabad, Telangana. 4. The Station House Officer, P. S. Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, Telangana. 5. T. Pooja, W/o. T. Ajith Singh, Aged about 36 years, Occ: House Wif-e, Rl/o. H. No. 3- 6-150, Beside lndian Bank, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. ...
RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of l\,4andamus, declaring the in-action of Respondent No. 3 on the representation, dt: 05. 03. 2020 given by the Petitioner with a request to renew the arms license No. 357/Narayanguda, which is covered for the i) 0. 32 NPB Pistol # 310580 and ii) 0. 22 Bore Pistol # 135636 and release the said arms to the Petitioner as illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Article 21 of the Constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 3 to renew the arm license No. 357/Narayanguda, which is covered for the i) 0.
32 NPB Pistol # 310580 and ii) 0. 22 Bore Pistol # 135636, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. L. B. KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER _1 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 17795 of 2O2O ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 2. Arms licence bearing No. 357/ Narayanguda was issued to the petitioner on 27. O7. 7989 which was valid up to 37. 12. 2014. On 17 . O4 . 2014 a show cause notice was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Central Zone, Hyderabad -3'd respondent to the petitioner stating that he was involved in Cr. No. 388 of 2Ol4 registered under Sections 342,324 and 506 of Indian Penal Code in Narayanguda Police Station, calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation as to why his Arms licence should not be cancelled.
Petitioner claims to have submitted his explanation on 13. 05. 2015. No decision was made on the notic. e issued. However, the Arms licence period expired on 37. 12. 2014 and was not subsequently renewed. On 05. O3. 2O2O, petitioner submitted application to the 3. d respondent requesting to renew his Arms licence. Alleging inaction on the said application, this writ petition is filed. 3. After completion of investigation in Cr. No. 388 of 2014, police filed charge sheet. The trial Court took cognizance of the offence, registered the case as C. C. No. 139 of 2015. In the said criminal case, petitioner was convicted. Against the said conviction, petitioner preferred Crl. R. C. No. 2294 ol 2Ol8 and the same is pending consideration of this Court.
While so, petitioner now states that the complainant and petitioner have now resolved the dispute -3 and accordingly, they have also entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the crime is likely to be closed shortly' He therefore, submits that as the request for renewal was not granted on the ground that petitioner was involved in crime' as petitioner would be acquitted consequent to the MOU, there would be no embargo in considering the application for renewal of licence' 4. The fact remains that as of now, petitioner is convicted in C. C. No. 139 of 2015. Crl. R C. No. 2294 of 2018 is pending consideration of this Court. Unless this Court agrees to record the MOU reached and acquits the petitioner, the decision of respondent police not to renew the Arms licence can not be faulted' 5.
lf the Criminal Revision Case ends in favour of petitioner and acquittal is granted to him, it is open to the petitioner to make a request for renewal of Arms licence granted to him in the year 1989. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file application before the Commissioner of Police' Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, after the disposal of Crl. R. C. No. 2294 ol 2Ol8 and to pursue the request for renewal ol Arms licence. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. S D/. M. MAN AS SISTANT RE AR //TRUE COPY// SECT N OFFICER To, of Home' State of Telangana' Secretariat 1. The Principal Secretary, Department porice co mm issionerate, Hvderabad' l1'B31f"1o*ro"rabad , +XltUS*3[*#l Hvderabad' Telansana' of Police' central Zone' . +f;58%X1,1, commissioner reansana, I Hii'd*utxlt? %:i:il$:rUruflt",ilderabad at Hvderabat State of Telangana ligr''"C;;;itiithe 6. Two CCs to GP ror r-ro#e tourl z Two CD CoPies MP ry*".
--- HIGH COURT DATED:1811212020 t 1 H s IA r4:' ORDER 0 2 JAN 20 2 1 WP. No. 17795 of 2020 * * o I . q d, DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS oA CoP, \,-r5 ^ l\-'s\
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.