Ashish Talgotra v. Addl.Dy.Commissioner of Police Arms and Explosive Licensing Unit

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. NOVEMBER 23 2015 'bs'

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 23rd November, 2015. + W.P.(C) 6105/2014 ASHISH TALGOTRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R. Satish Kumar, Adv. Versus ADDL.DY.COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ARMS AND EXPLOSIVE LICENSING UNIT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Raman Duggal with Ms. Aayushi Gupta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The petition impugns the order, dated 21st May, 2014 of Hon'ble the Lt. Governor, Delhi acting as an Appellate Authority under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959, of dismissal of appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 21st March, 2014 of the respondent Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Licensing) of refusing the application of the petitioner for an arms licence. 2. Notice of the petition was issued. In the order dated 28th January, 2015, two judgments of a learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 9th September, 2013 in W.P.(C) No.1631/2012 titled Vinod Kumar Vs. The State and dated 20th September, 2013 in W.P.(C) No.5959/2013 titled Sahil Kohli Vs. Additional Commissioner of Police relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner and the response of the counsel for the respondent thereto that the same rely upon the judgments of the Allahabad High Court which have been considered by the Full Bench of that Court, were noted. In subsequent order dated 13th April, 2015, the contention of the counsel for the respondent that the issue was being examined by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.41/2015 (incorrectly recorded in the order as LPA No.14/2015), is recorded. On 28th July, 2015, the counsel for the respondent handed over a copy of the judgment dated 29th April, 2015 of the Division Bench in LPA No.41/2015 titled Parveen Kumar Beniwal Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi. On request of the counsel for the petitioner, liberty was given to him to file written arguments and judgment reserved. 3. The respondent, vide order dated 21st March, 2014 refused arms licence to the petitioner reasoning (i) that the petitioner does not have any good reason for grant of an arms licence; (ii) that the petitioner does not have any specific threat; and (iii) that the local police had reported that the petitioner does not have any requirement or need of weapon. 4. The petitioner, born on 26th September, 1991 and carrying on construction business in the name and style of M/s. Khemraj & Sons Construction Pvt. Ltd. appealed to Hon'ble the Lt. Governor contending that the respondent Licensing Authority had applied the wrong test in refusing arms licence to the petitioner inasmuch as the test to be applied was not whether the applicant had a need or requirement for a licence but whether the petitioner is disentitled from possessing or carrying firearm. During the course of hearing before the Appellate Authority, he further contended that in the course of his business he has to handle large amount of cash daily, particularly when returning home late at night and thus needs to have a firearm on his person for his protection. 5. The Appellate Authority however applied the same test and held that the petitioner had not established any genuine need to justify the grant of an arms licence and there was no need for interference in the order of the Licensing Authority. 6. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the judgments supra relied upon by the petitioner in the petition itself indeed held that except in cases covered by Section 13(3)(a) which do not fall under Section 14(1), though the Licensing Authority has a discretion whether to grant licence or not, such a discretion is not absolute nor can it be exercised on subjective considerations. It was accordingly held that an arms licence cannot be denied to a person in whose case a situation contemplated by Section 14(1) of the Act does not exist and solely on the ground that there is no specific threat to him or his family members. It was reasoned that it is not possible for the police to be present everywhere and every time to p