Arms licence suspension upheld where authority recorded satisfaction of threat to public peace and issued show cause notice.

Section 17(3) of the Arms Act permits suspension or revocation of an arms licence where the licensing authority, on relevant material, records subjective satisfaction that continued possession of the weapon would endanger public peace and safety. Applying that principle, the Court found the suspension valid because the authority had formed such satisfaction on the basis of a law and order concern. The challenge that the suspension was indefinite also failed, as the order was accompanied by a show cause notice requiring a response within a specified time, so it was not treated as open-ended.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the arms licence under Section 17(3) of the Arms Act was valid on the basis of the authority's satisfaction that possession of the weapon would endanger public peace and safety, and whether the suspension could be said to be for an indefinite period.

Analysis: Section 17(3) empowers the licensing authority to suspend or revoke an arms licence where the authority is satisfied that such action is necessary for public peace and public safety. The governing principle, as applied by the Court, is that where relevant material exists and the authority records subjective satisfaction that continuance of the licence holder's possession of arms would create a law and order problem, the authority may suspend the licence. The Court also noted that the suspension was accompanied by a show cause notice requiring the petitioner to respond within a specified time, so the order could not be treated as one of indefinite duration.

Conclusion: The suspension order was upheld and no interference was warranted; the challenge to the alleged indefinite suspension also failed.

---