Indians For Guns

Priya Dutt aims to bring Dad's beloved gun home

Priya Dutt aims to bring Dad's beloved gun home
Debasish Panigrahi
Mumbai, December 4 (HINDUSTAN TIMES,05.12.06)

For close to four decades, they occupied pride of place in the late Sunil Dutt's Mumbai home. Kept as showpieces, the actor-MP's three beloved double-bore rifles were surrendered to the police by his daughter Priya when he passed away in May last year.

Now, at least one of the guns seems set to return home.

Priya, who has taken Sunil Dutt's place in Parliament, told HT: "When my father passed away, we surrendered three guns to the police, who assured me they would be returned." She had applied for possession of the guns on "emotional" grounds. After some objections were raised about transferring three firearms to one person, Priya had said they could be divided between her sister Namrata and herself.

Officials in the police's firearms licence department said they planned to transfer at least one gun to Priya soon. Priya knows where she will keep the gun when it is returned - on a particular shelf Sunil Dutt had got designed in his new Bandra home.

But it seems another double-bore rifle owned by another Dutt - actor Sanjay - will not be returned to the family.

The sale of the gun - a legal firearm confiscated by the police after Sanjay's arrest in the 1993 serial blasts case - has been cleared, according to a source in the firearms licence department. In 2001, Sanjay had sought permission to sell the gun to a licence holder of his choice. Officials had, however, postponed any decision as the Mumbai blasts trial was in progress. Now that Sanjay has been convicted under the Arms Act, the gun can be sold. An official in the department said: "If Sanjay wants to sell the gun to a licence holder of his choice, we will certainly consider that."

Is the objection in transferring three firearms to one person valid ?

I think Sunjay owns or did own a Colt Python cannot recall where I read this.

On a seperate note, some of the actors of yesteryears were avid hunters namely Johnny Walker

While Priya Dutt's intentions are laudable, I am not sure her brother is anything other than a poster boy for the worst that could happen to firearms ownership.

In any case, as Piyush very rightly points out, there is no reason for the police to behave like the Gestapo - individuals can still own three guns and there is no reason why two of them could not be transferred to Priya and one to her sister. It isn't a case of give them an inch they take a yard with India's Nazis - it is give them an inch they take a light year.

What a terribly sad state of affairs!

Piyush,

To answer your your question. As things stand today, each citizen is subject to a 3 gun limit, with no more than 1 gun of each "type" i.e. - you can have any combination of 1 shotgun, 1 rifle, 1 muzzle loader, 1 handgun... subject to a maximum of 3 guns per person! AFAIK, previous license holders, who had several guns on their name, were allowed to keep their guns during their lifetime. But on inheriting these guns, the heirs would be subject to this 3 gun limit, like everyone else.

It's a stupid law, but the current law nonetheless!

Cheers!
Abhijeet

Abhijeet,

The Arms Act as it is , prescribes a three gun limit but nowhere,either in the Act or the allied Rules or in any govt. instruction,is it laid down that a person can hold only one gun of a specific category.Therefore a licensee can hold more than one rifle,infact she/he can hold three,provided their license says so.The licensing authority is not barred from allowing a licensee to hold three rifles or three shotguns or three revolvers or three pistols.

As far as those holding more than three firearms prior to the imposition of the three gun limit are concerned,they were given the option of retaining three weapons of their choice and either selling the remaining weapons to a licensee or arms dealer or of surrendering them to the govt.Anybody holding more than three weapons after the imposition of the three gun limit would be holding them in violation of the Arms Act.This is because there was no saving clause in the amendment to the Arms Act as was the case in the repeal of the old Arms Act or Rules.

Priya Dutt should ask the licensing authority of Mumbai as to under which provision of the Arms Act or Rules is she being denied the right to retain her father three licensed guns.If the state govt. of Maharashtra has issued any such instructions then this is in violation of the Arms Act as only the Central govt. is empowered to issue such instructions and that too ,after making relevant rules as laid down in the Arms Act and in accordance with its provisons.

penpusher

Wow penpusher! This is information indeed! The licensing authorities in Delhi, who are supposed to have their act together (no pun intended), explain the rules the same as I have mentioned above...

Do you know of cases, where people have 3 firearms of the same type on their license? If this is not in the rules and in spite of this if licensing authorities are interpreting it differently - is this different interpretation on the basis of some unknown internal memo? Or simply ignorance or obduracy on their part?

Cheers!
Abhijeet

Abhijeet,

There are numerous instances of people holding more than one weapon of a particular category.The reason why the licensing authorities follow this practise(of allowing only one category of a weapon per person) is because that is what the clerk tells them.This is the general practise but there is no section of the Arms Act or any provision of the Arms Rule's that says that it should be so.I have never seen any circular of the Central govt. that says that it should be so.

penpusher

Just imagine - if the pencil rodents in licensing offices could jerk a Member of PArliament around on something like this, what possible hope there could be for the common Indian? An utterly miserable state of affairs if there was one!

Hi Abhijeet,
Most of the shooters from indian team has multiple rifles of same type.. So I dont think Indian Arms act can have such restrictions..
Also one of my relative has 2 shot guns.. one his dad's and now a new one...

Regards
Deepak

Abhijeet,
I think penpusher has correctly intrpreted the three gun limit,i checked with two different writers of arms law(books with cases)nowhere it is interpreted as the Delhi police is doing it.Will try to get more information on it.The way Delhi police is interpreting it is unusual.

penpusher";p="7380 wrote:Abhijeet,

The Arms Act as it is , prescribes a three gun limit but nowhere,either in the Act or the allied Rules or in any govt. instruction,is it laid down that a person can hold only one gun of a specific category.Therefore a licensee can hold more than one rifle,infact she/he can hold three,provided their license says so.The licensing authority is not barred from allowing a licensee to hold three rifles or three shotguns or three revolvers or three pistols.

penpusher

That is a great piece of information,penpusher.Thanks much.Neverthless, what with the three gun limit,I would like to have one of each.

Best-
Vikram

A member of the NRAI or a Rifle club recognised by the Ministry of sports is allowed an additional .22 rimfire rifle,over and above the 3 gun limit.

penpusher

Wow..
so 5 guns/ rifle for club members...? Thats gr8 news..
Byt he way r u sure about this? all members or only the people who are in top 25?

Looks like Mr. penpusherh has all info related to Arms act..

Deepak

mishradk,

Its 4 guns not 5 (3+1) and this is for any member of a Rifle club recogonised by the Ministry of Sports,GOI.

Looks like Mr. penpusherh has all info related to Arms act..

penpusher

Some Info on Dutt clan:
Mr. Dutt Sn. originally owned a DBBL shotgun by mannlicher Shoenaur and a .32 Cal Webley & Scott revolver. This shotgun was the 1st fire arm that Dutt Jr. held on his Arms License. He bought a Parker Hale 375 H&H bolt action rifle later. When he was arrested for serial bomb blast in Mumbai, Dutt Jr's battery consisted of a 375 H&H side lock DBBL by H&H(now totally withered away), a 270 Win.by Brno, a Beretta SXS 12 bore,a Merckel O/U 12 bore,a .22 Hornet by Brno and a 30-06 "A" type Mauser. All these were collectively held on his friend's and his own licenses obtained from Gwalior(3 each) AFTER his Mumbai Arms License stood revoked and cancelled when he fired recklessly all around his bunglow one late evening in state of Paranoia( heavy on drugs). Luckily no one was hurt except his LOTUS car that took most of the "00" buckshots. This case some how never came up in public eyes due to either the good will that Mr. Dutt sn. commanded as an MP or maybe the Paparazzi who weren't all that alert and attentive then.. He (Jr)never ever owned a handgun (officially). Some of the fire arms mentioned are still lying in the Mumbai police armory. The 30-06, the .22 Hornet and the 12 bore Merckel have been sold already as these it seems were on his friend's license who was permitted to sell them by the TADAA court. In fact this info is readily available with all the gun dealers in Mumbai. My heart bleeds at all these fire arms being wasted away in police armory but then again I wonder which guns our current MP (Priya)is eying to possess as an HEIRLOOM !!!...
Marksman.
PS:

"her brother is anything other than a poster boy for the worst that could happen to firearms ownership"

Mehul!!!!