Allahabad High Court
/11649/2025 of SATEESH YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER on 8 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11649 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Ms. Niharika Sahai, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hariom Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - C No. - 11649 of 2025
Court No. - 17
HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Ms. Niharika Sahai, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hariom Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has sought issuance of a direction to the District Magistrate, Lucknow to decide the License Form No.58/2024.
3. On the basis of written instruction dated 01.12.2025 duly signed by the District Magistrate, Lucknow, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that there are certain defects in the application and some discrepancies in the facts that have come to light in the police report stated in the petitioner's affidavit.
4. A Copy of the aforesaid instruction is taken on record.
5. Be that as it may, Rule 13 of the Arms Rules, 2016 provides that the application for arm license shall be decided within a period of 60 days from the receipt of police report, therefore, the respondents ought to have taken an appropriate decision on the petitioner's license application and to have communicated the same to the petitioner.
6. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed off granting liberty to the petitioner to not press the earlier application and submit a fresh license application by removing defects that have crept in the earlier application. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anurag Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sateesh Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)
Respondent no.1 shall take appropriate decision in the application keeping in view the provisions contained in Rule 13 of Arms Rules, 2016. December 8, 2025 V. Sinha WRIC No. 11649 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench