Sarfraj @ Kallu Pahalwan vs State of U.P. and Others

V.K. Shukla, J.—Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner questioning the validity of the order dated 27.7.2006 passed by the Licensing Authority and order of its affirmance in appeal dated 18.9.2008 passed by the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut.

Brief background of the case is that Petitioner is licensee of fire arm. First information report being Case Crime No. 188 of 2005, under Sections 353, 420, 424, 467, 468, 471, 224, 41/411, I.P.C. read with Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act was lodged against the Petitioner on the ground that Petitioner and others were involved in the business of dismantling stolen vehicle. Petitioner and other were caught, and at the said point of time on the call given by the Petitioner, crowd collected and facilitated the escape of the Petitioner from police custody. Based on this criminal case, proceedings for cancellation has been recommended and pursuant to the same, show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner. Thereafter, Petitioner submitted his reply. Licensing Authority thereafter passed order of cancellation. Petitioner preferred appeal and said appeal has also been dismissed.

Sri. Mohd. Khalil, learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case mere pendency of criminal case could not be made foundation and basis for passing order of cancellation, as has been done in the present case, as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.

Countering the said submission, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that rightful view has been taken in the matter and no interference should be made, as activity of the Petitioner clearly had the effect of endangering public peace and public safety, as such no interference should be made.

After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging in the present case is that Petitioner along with others were arrested in connection with criminal case wherein stolen vehicle were being dismantled. At the said point of time, Petitioner and others collected crowd and crowd was collected along with Petitioner interfere in the discharge of public duty and in furtherance to the same, Petitioner escape was facilitated from the police custody. Nature of offence wherein Petitioner has been implicated and charge sheeted clearly has effect of endanger public peace and public safety.

Once criminal case is there effecting public peace and public safety, then in such situation exercise of its authority of cancellation as affirmed in appeal cannot be faulted in view of judgment in the case Ramesh Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Station Officer, .

Consequently, present writ petition is dismissed.