PRAVINSINH HIMMATSINH SOLANKIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     C/SCA/4361/2026                               JUDGMENT DATED: 30/03/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4361 of 2026


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================================

            Approved for Reporting                Yes          No

==========================================================
                       PRAVINSINH HIMMATSINH SOLANKI
                                    Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA DAVDA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                              Date : 30/03/2026

                                JUDGMENT


1.      RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Aditya Davda, learned AGP
for the respondents waives service of notice of rule on behalf of
the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsels for
the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for 昀椀nal
hearing today.


2.      Present petition is 昀椀led by the petitioner under Articles 14
and 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of
the Arms Act, 1959 and the Arms Rules, 2016 seeking following
reliefs:

       “a) To issue a Writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ,


                                  Page 1 of 4
     C/SCA/4361/2026                                           JUDGMENT DATED: 30/03/2026




       order, or direction, quashing and setting aside the order dated
       19.08.2025 passed by Respondent No. 2 and the Order dated
       07.02.2026 passed by Respondent No. 1;

       b) To issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ,
       order, or direction, directing Respondent No. 2 to forthwith
       e昀昀ect the jurisdictional transfer of Arms License No.
       LN12204A7A16622/85/ii/revo from Panchmahal to Vadodara in
       strict compliance with Rule 17(2) of the Arms Rules, 2016;

       c) Consequent to the transfer, this Hon'ble Court may be
       pleased to direct Respondent No. 2 to forthwith decide and grant
       the petitioner's renewal application dated 29.12.2023 under the
       Arms Act, 1959;

       d) Pending the admission, hearing, and 昀椀nal disposal of this
       petition, grant ad-interim relief staying the operation of both the
       First Impugned Order dated 19.08.2025 and the Second
       Impugned Order dated 07.02.2026;

       e) Pass any such other and further orders, directions, or writs as
       this Hon'ble Court may deem 昀椀t and proper in the facts and
       circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”


3.      Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the
petitioner is a retired Forest Department o昀케cial and he was
granted         a       self-protection       Arms           License      bearing           no.
LN12204A7A16622/85/ii/revo                   by        the     District      Magistrate,
Panchmahal in October 1989. That, the arms license was
continuously renewed by the petitioner and the most recent
renewal of the license extended up to 31.12.2023.                               That, the
昀椀rearm was con昀椀scated during an inadvertent transit incident at
Dabolim Airport on 13.06.2018, from which the petitioner has
been acquitted vide judgment dated 30.03.2024 passed by the
JMFC       “C”         Court,   Vasco,      Goa,        in     Criminal       Case      No.
AOA/1262/AA/2019/C. That, following the acquittal, the petitioner
had 昀椀led an application before concerned Court for the release of


                                         Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/4361/2026                          JUDGMENT DATED: 30/03/2026




the con昀椀scated revolver from muddamal custody which came to
be allowed. That, the petitioner 昀椀led a formal application seeking
the jurisdictional transfer of his Arms License from Panchmahal
to Vadodara which came to be rejected vide order dated
19.08.2025 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Vadodara.
That, the Additional District Magistrate, Panchmahal, issued the
No Objection Certi昀椀cate and formally struck the license from its
register. That, the petitioner 昀椀led an appeal before the Home
Minister, Government of Gujarat and then re昀椀led the corrected
appeal via RPAD, addressed to the Joint Secretary, Home
Department. That, respondent No. 1 vide order dated 07.02.2026
summarily dismissed the statutory appeal as time barred.


4.      Being aggrieved and dissatis昀椀ed with the impugned orders
dated 19.08.2025 and 07.02.2026 passed by the respondent -
authorities, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.


5.      Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.


6.       Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
impugned orders passed by the respondent - authorities are
illegal, unjust, arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the facts and
materials on record and the provisions of the Act and therefore,
are required to be quashed and set aside. He has submitted the
same facts which are narrated in the memo of petition and has
further submitted that the petitioner seeks the valid transfer and
renewal of his license for the sole purpose of retrieving his
legally owned revolver from Goa police custody, transport it
safely to Gujarat, and thereafter auction and lawfully dispose of
it under section 21 of the Arms Act, 1959. He has urged that the

                               Page 3 of 4
        C/SCA/4361/2026                                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 30/03/2026




   impugned orders passed by the respondent - authorities are
   required to be quashed and set aside and the present petition is
   required to be allowed.


   7.       Mr. Davda, learned AGP for the respondents has objected
   the petition and submitted that the respondent - authorities have
   not committed any error while passing the impugned orders. He
   has submitted that no interference is required to be called for
   and the petition being meritless deserves to be dismissed.


   8.       I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
   respective parties and perused the material placed on record. I
   have also considered the impugned orders passed by the
   respondent - authorities. Considering the submissions canvassed
   by both the sides and the facts of the case, it is open for the
   petitioner to move a fresh application seeking renewal of his
   arms license in accordance with law before the concerned
   respondent authority with the relevant documentary evidences
   and the concerned respondent authority shall decide the same in
   accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, after giving
   proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.


   9.       With the aforesaid conclusion, the petition is disposed of.
   No order as to costs.

                                                                 (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
   ANUSRI



Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 06/04/2026 17:08:21




                                                  Page 4 of 4