Mere Pendency Of Criminal Case Not Ground To Refuse Arms License When There Is Serious Apprehension To Life: Entrepreneur Moves Kerala High Court

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by an entrepreneur against the order of the District Magistrate rejecting the renewal of his 'Arms license'. 

Single Judge Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan has admitted the matter and sought the response of the State authorities. 

The petitioner, who is involved in the construction activities of flats and villas in and around Thiruvananthapuram District averred that his business involves risks to his person and property due to which he had applied for an 'Arms license' involving (a) Gun (b) pistol for self-protection, and obtained the same after complying with the legal procedures. The petitioner stated that his Arms License had been issued with effect from 1992 and renewed continuously since then. 

While considering the petitioner's renewal application, the Additional District Magistrate took note of the objection raised by the IG and City Police that the petitioner was an accused in a criminal case. The Commissioner of Police, Cyber Security Department, had also reported that the case was under re-investigation, and that there was no threat to the life and property of the petitioner. The Additional District Magistrate, on taking note that the petitioner was unable to produce a court order regarding his acquittal in the case, and that he was also unable to substantiate his threat to life and property, rejected his application.

Petitioner claims that renewal was rejected in a mechanical manner. He averred that although there is a pending criminal case against him, the High Court had issued an interim stay of further proceedings, on the petitioner's application to quash proceedings, on March 24, 2023. He thus submitted that the mere reason of pendency of a criminal case could not be sufficient ground for rejection of renewal of his Arms License, considering the serious apprehension to his life and property.

On being aggrieved by the decision of the District Magistrate, the petitioner averred that he had preferred an appeal before the Land Revenue Commissioner. However, his appeal too was rejected vide Order dated April 25, 2023. He averred that the said decision was also perverse and legally unsustainable.

The petitioner submitted that he is "legally entitled" to the renewal of his Arms License as a matter of right unless there existed any specific ground for refusal under Section 14 of the Arms Act which stipulates the grounds under which Arms License may be refused. 

The plea has been moved through Advocate S. Nikhil Sankar. 

Case Title: Alexander Vadakkedom v. Land Revenue Commissioner & Ors.