Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar Singh @ Munna ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The appellate order rejecting the appeal solely on limitation grounds is set aside and the appeal must be heard on its merits.
Summary
Vijay Kumar Singh filed a writ petition challenging the suspension of his Arms License No.7/98 and the rejection of his appeal by the Divisional Commissioner on the ground of limitation. He sought quashing of the suspension order dated 20.03.2017 and the appellate order dated 09.10.2024/21.10.2024, and directed the authorities to reinstate his license. The Court observed that the appellate authority had not adjudicated the merits and had dismissed the appeal solely on delay. Accordingly, the Court set aside the appellate order and directed the Divisional Commissioner to hear the appeal on its merits within a stipulated timeline. The petitioner was ordered to appear within two weeks and the proceedings to be concluded within three months, after which a merit-based order would be communicated.
Issues considered
- Whether the suspension of the petitioner’s Arms License can be quashed on constitutional grounds.
- Whether an appellate authority can reject an appeal solely on the ground of limitation without hearing the merits.
- Whether the appellate order dated 09.10.2024/21.10.2024 is liable to be set aside.
Subjects
- Arms License
- Suspension
- Limitation
- Appellate jurisdiction
- Writ petition
- Constitutional rights
- Civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5987 of 2025
======================================================
Vijay Kumar Singh @ Munna Thakur Son of Sri Shivji Singh @ Shivji
Thakur, Resident of Village- Nethua, Police Station- Gaura, District-Saran at
Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra.
4. The District Magistrate, Saran.
5. The Distirct Arms Magistrate, Saran.
6. The SHO, Madhaura Police Station, District-Saran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Udai Shankar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Archana Meenakshee, GP-6
Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, AC to GP-6
Mr. Harish Singh, AC to GP-6
Mr. Rana Veer Prawar, AC to GP-6
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The instant writ application has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
(i) To quash the order dated 20.03.2017
vide Memo No.110/ श o, passed by the District
Magistrate, Saran, whereby and whereunder the
Arms license of the petitioner bearing Arms License
No.7/98 has been suspended with immediate effect,
alongwith several other person’ Arms Licenses and
he has been asked to deposit his arms with the police
station, Madhaura.
(ii) To quash the order dated
09.10.2024/21.10.2024, passed by the Divisional
Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra in Arms
Patna High Court CWJC No.5987 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
Appeal Case No.184 of 2024, whereby and
whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner has
been rejected without merit of the appeal only on the
ground of limitation.
(iii) To command and direct the
respondents authorities to revoke the suspension of
the Arms License No.7/98 of the petitioner similarly
to the other’s licenses have been released/
suspension of Arms License have been revoked by
the respondents.
(iv) For any other relief(s) for which the
petitioner is found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
issue pertains to the constitutional rights of the petitioner;
however, from the impugned order dated 09.10.2024/ 21.10.2024,
it appears that the matter has not been adjudicated on merits. It is,
therefore, submitted that the appellate authority may be directed
to hear the appeal on merits, for which the petitioner undertakes
to make himself available as and when directed.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that,
admittedly, the appellate order has not been passed on merits, and
the petitioner may be directed to pursue the remedy as provided
under law, for which appropriate directions may be issued.
5. Considering the fact that the impugned order does
not reflect adjudication of the petitioner’s claim on merits and has
been rejected solely on the ground of delay, this Court finds it
Patna High Court CWJC No.5987 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
appropriate to set aside the order dated 09.10.2024/ 21.10.2024.
6. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran, is directed to
hear the appeal on merits. The petitioner shall make himself
available within a period of two weeks from today, and on his
first appearance, the date of hearing shall be communicated to
him. The entire proceedings shall be concluded within a period of
three months thereafter, and the order so passed on merits, shall
be duly communicated to the petitioner.
7. The petitioner is at liberty to place on record all
supporting materials as well as judicial pronouncements upon
which, he seeks to rely, and the same shall be considered in
accordance with law.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
instant writ application stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U
Checking your session…