Patna High Court
Mukti Nath TiwariversusThe State of Bihar through the Home Secretary,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The interlocutory application is allowed and disposed, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the competent authority.
Summary
Petitioner Mukti Nath Tiwari filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the authorities to consider his representation dated 10-12-2024 for adding a revolver/pistol to his existing rifle licence. The District Magistrate, Ara, rejected the addition despite the matter being sub judice, prompting an interlocutory application (IA No.1/2025) to amend the prayer and seek additional relief. The court, after hearing counsel, held the IA to be a formal application and allowed it, disposing of the IA. The court noted the precedent in Aakash Gaurav v. State of Bihar, which mandates a seven‑day consideration period for such additions, and directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the competent authority. If the representation is ignored, the petitioner may pursue remedies under the Arms Act or any other legal avenue.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate's rejection of the addition of a revolver/pistol to an existing rifle licence is arbitrary and violative of procedural requirements under the Arms Act.
- Whether the interlocutory application seeking to amend the prayer and add further relief is maintainable.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- arms licence
- addition of weapon
- procedural time limit
- Arms Act
- writ jurisdiction
- representation
- interlocutory application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1002 of 2025
======================================================
Mukti Nath Tiwari Son of Sri Narvdeshwar Tiwari @ Narbdeshwar Nath
Tiwari. Villge - Chandwa, P.S. Ara Nawada, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Home Secretary, Government of Bihar.
2. Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Bhojpur.
3. District Magistrate, Bhojpur.
4. Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur.
5. Additional District Magistrate, (Arms), Bhojpur.
6. District Arms Magistrate, Bhojpur.
7. Sub- Divisional Officer, Ara.
8. S.H.O. Ara Nawada Police Station, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Manisha Pandey
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vijaya Laxmi Srivastava, AC to SC-23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 25-06-2026 Re:- I.A. No.01 of 2025
This interlocutory application has been filed for
amending the prayer by adding additional relief by challenging
the order dated 20.06.2025 passed in Arms Case No.31 of 2025,
passed by the District Magistrate, Ara, whereby the N.P. Bore
Revolver/ pistol in existing N.P. Bore Rifle License No.35/2006
has been arbitrarily rejected, despite the matter being sub judice.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as
the present Interlocutory Application being formal in nature, is
not opposed, and hence is allowed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1002 of 2025(3) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
3. Accordingly, I.A. No.1/2025 stands disposed of.
Re:- CWJC No.1002 of 2025
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
writ application was originally filed seeking a direction upon the
respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated
10.12.2024 submitted before the District Magistrate, Bhojpur at
Ara (respondent no. 3) for addition of a revolver/pistol licence
in the existing rifle licence, in the light of the judgment of this
Court in Aakash Gaurav vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in
BLJ 2019 (1) 697. It is submitted that in the said judgment, this
Court has observed that an application for addition of arms in an
existing licence ought to be considered within a period of seven
days from the date of filing of such application.
5. In view of the fact that an order has now been
passed by the District Magistrate, Ara, the petitioner has a fresh
cause of action to challenge the said order in an appropriate
proceeding.
6. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed
of.
7. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file a
representation before the competent authority along with the
judgments on which he seeks to place reliance against the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1002 of 2025(3) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
rejection order. In the event the representation is not considered
or the petitioner remains aggrieved by the decision taken
thereon, he shall be at liberty to avail such remedy as may be
available under the provisions of the Arms Act or to take
recourse to any other remedy available in law.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.