‘CERTIFICATE OF CAPABILITY TO HANDLE FIREARMS’

[mbsolan]

In reply to this question filed under RTI act 2005 Public information officer says:-

Question: Whether submit of the document '' Certificate of capability to handle firearms'' a mandatory requirement under the arms act 1959 and the arms rules 1962 for the issue of new arms lience in HP?

Answer: as per the instructions dated 22-4-2010 received from under secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, shimla 02, No licence may be granted without police verification which will include report on i) antecedents of the applicant ii) assessment of threat iii) capability of the applicant to handle arms iv) any other information which the police authority might consider relevant for the grant or refusal of licence.

[mbsolan]

please explain what is the correct Interpretation of this

(iii) capability of the applicant to handle arms
In reference to guidelines in notification no.v-11016/16/2009-Arms Ministry of Home Affairs dated 31-3-2010

(a)are we talking about police internal assessment on how they assess the applicants capability to handle firearms,

or

(b)are we talking about medical fitness report to prove applicant is physically fit to handle firearms

or

(c)are we talking about proving some extra capability of an applicant to handle firearms by submit of certificate of training to handle firearms

[ruffian]

Dear mbsolan,

It simply means whether the applicant knows to "handle safely" or not the firearm for which he is applying for license.
Two of my friends in Kullu applied for .32 pistol license and were asked to comply with this condition.
They simply went to a police armourer and he showed them how to load, unload, dismantle and use a pistol( a 9mm though) and asked them to repeat the process. They did satisfactorily and immediately a certificate was issued.
I don't think there is anything wrong with the condition as the licensing authority just wants to ensure, by this certificate, that the applicant knows to handle safely the firearm applied for.

Regards

[mbsolan]

dear ruffian,

the document Certificate for Capability to handle Firearms (CCHF) is not a mandatory requirement under arms act and rules as i failed to get it through RTI.Authorities quote MHA notification as final document for this requirement .

The situation is worse in other districts as armorers there are unable to help in the absence of any directions from the administration. The legality of CCHF issued by a particular armourer is questionable as he does not hold any licence for training individuals. There is also no clarity as to who holds authority for issue of CCHF and authorised by whom.

I agree there is no problem if licencing authority wants to satify himself on the fact that the applicant has knowledge of handling arms he has applied for,

but you cant ask for a certificate when you dont even have a school.

First make a school, then a training program and then the qualifying certificate. cannot go backwards. Issue and acceptance in your quoted case is a matter of similar judgement by issuing armourer and accepting authority. This is not how it is defined by a judgement or notification issued by any authority. All authorities quote MHA notification as final document for this requirement.

This document is not listed in the list of documents supplied along with application form sold
in the DC offices.If this document is not listed in there, it cannot be asked, if it cannot be asked it cannot be procured.

a new question arises
if Licencing authority (as per arms act) does not require a certain document for issue of licence, can that new document be made a mandatory requirement for completion of verification by police authorities whose job is only verification?

Whenever you ask them about mandatory requirement of CCHF, you are supplied with a copy of MHA notification of 31-3-2010.

In reply to this question filed under RTI act 2005 Public information officer supplied the following information:-

Question: Whether submit of the document '' Certificate of capability to handle firearms'' a mandatory requirement under the arms act 1959 and the arms rules 1962 for the issue of new arms lience in HP?

Answer: ''as per the instructions dated 22-4-2010 received from under secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, shimla 02, No licence may be granted without police verification which will include report on i) antecedents of the applicant ii) assessment of threat iii) capability of the applicant to handle arms iv) any other information which the police authority might consider relevant for the grant or refusal of licence.''




Thank you for a response,
regards

[goodboy_mentor]

mbsolan Entire thing has been answered and has been squarely mentioned that no guideline or notification can override the words or the intent of law in question. Even Supreme Court judgment in this matter has been mentioned. It appears either you have either not read the replies carefully or have not been able to understand the concept I tried to explain.

Anyways whatever you are trying to interpret does not appear worth interpreting in the very first place. Why? Because of the following:

1. The notification or policy should have meaning of law as defined in Article 13 of the Constitution. Which I doubt the MHA Policy dated 31-3-2010 is law as defined in Article 13.

2. Entire content of the notification issued by State Government referred by you is not available for reading and understanding. If it is just that MHA Notification dated 31-3-2010 forwarded by State Government, I know that illegal MHA Notification. In my opinion it is not a Notification under Arms Act 1959 but a just a "Policy" which is illegal and unconstitutional. Moreover it has not mentioned that the notification has been issued under which Section of Arms Act 1959. It is also going against the provsions of Arms Act 1959 as well its objects and reasons.

3. Notifications related to firearms under Arms Act 1959 are issued by the Central Government i.e. Ministry of Home Affairs and not the State Governments.

4. Whenever any Notification that has force of law is issued under any Act, the specific Section of that law that empowers the government to issue notification is also mentioned in the Notification. Also the Notification is published in the official gazette. For example this is example of Notification http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16532 Is the "Notification" referred by you done in this format mentioning the Section of law that empowers them to issue such notification?

5. It appears that under secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh has no idea of Arms Act 1959 or what he is taking. He is talking about threat, capability of the applicant to handle arms, any other information which the police authority might consider relevant for the grant or refusal of license. Arms Act 1959 does not give all these wide and discretionary powers to the government or police. There is a good reason behind it. The reason is because arms are fundamental right under the Constitution.

Hope the things are clear to you now.

a new question arises
if Licencing authority (as per arms act) does not require a certain document for issue of licence, can that new document be made a mandatory requirement for completion of verification by police authorities whose job is only verification?

No. Licensing Authority has to go strictly as per Arms Act 1959. No government guideline/ policy or notification can be issued against the provisions of Arms Act 1959.

ruffian the discussion is if they are allowed to do all this by Arms Act 1959 or not? If not, then there is some really good and strong reason behind it. There are many things that appear very harmless or supposedly good in the beginning but transform into something very atrocious and troublesome later on.

[mbsolan]

sir goodboy_mentor,
The state government has only forwarded the MHA notification with its own endorsement dt 22-4-2010.
I am only looking forward to words of advice from all seniors in the forum. My understanding may be wrong at some places but open to correction. I am not a lawyer. Thank you so much for correcting my interpretation by your opinion.

received correct explanation from your opinion of the policy in circulation. That only supports my point i was trying to make from my limited interpretation which may have looked worthless to you.But this is a problem which is faced by every common applicant.

Please give me a judgement which puts this entire Policy circulation of 31-3-2010 unconstitutional and illegal. A specific judgement which talks of this policy circulation can be more helpful more than other judgements.Police authorities have no legal knowledge of difference between circulation and notification. Other judgements will be most helpful for proving a point of right in the courts but not in front of a constable who has received instructions of strict adherence from superiors.

I understand your point that its only an advisory which lacks legislation, but this needs to be proven illegal by a court judgement or a proper notification. Licencing Authorities are still working according to this circulation which they have received from their bosses.

I am unable to close this topic even after Entire thing has been answered and has been squarely mentioned by your good self. I have reported a common problem in this forum for letting everyone know of the problem and get words of advice and opinions from all. I am sure everyone reading this topic will find ways to address this problem in a better way.

I thank you for your time, opinions and correct interpretation of law.

regards
mbsolan

[goodboy_mentor]

Sir mbsolan law is nothing but strong logic and reason put in codified form. I am equally open to be corrected any time and my "interpretation" may not be always correct. Your interpretation is by no means worthless. It is only that there is not much use interpreting that policy since it is not law as per my understanding. Your interpretation and understanding of the matter is correct and I appreciate the efforts you have taken to understand the matter.

Unfortunately there is no judgment which puts this entire Policy circulation of 31-3-2010 unconstitutional and illegal. It will be done only if this matter is taken up properly in courts. Till then I do not think there is going to be some clear solution to this problem. MHA has cleverly created this policy to create confusion which the licensing authorities can use or misuse as they want.

[mbsolan]

Courts and constitution may guarantee rights to its citizens but getting a licence mostly works with personal obligation of netaji. Our system doesnt work until phone bell rings from secretariat or netaji.
Constitution gave rights but they are delivered to common citizens by a gesture of personal favor.

[goodboy_mentor]

Even the best Constitutions, the best laws and the best courts in the world will fail if people are willing to take nonsense instead of fighting for their rights. How may arms license applicants know that arms or getting an arms license is their right? How many arms license applicants carefully read and understand Arms Act 1959 and its rules before applying for license? On the contrary many are more willing to grovel here and there before some neta or his chamcha. What more can be said?

[Virendra S Rathore]

Well if the Government wants to bring in such verification measures for any and every license applicant, onus is on the Govt. only to provide adequate facilities and swift procedure for such verifications.
Prinicply there is nothing wrong with a basic check that the man asking for entilement of Gun carry is physically, mentally and skillwise fit to carry and use. But this should only be a check and not a choke point.
If it is misused then it would be very difficult to get past and we'll have to file law suits for passing every damn stage of the license application.

Regards,
Virendra

[mbsolan]

Fully agreed with sir rathore opinion

[nasada]

Himachal Pradesh Public Service Guarantee Act notification no. Home(A)A(3)-2/2010 dated 29-02-2012

PSGA2012_A1b police.pdf

[miroflex]

SSB here probably refers to the Sashatra Seema Bal which perhaps provides training in the use of firearms to people living in border areas.

[nasada]

There is no notification in the state of Himachal Pradesh authorising any agency for issue of this certificate. But police verification are not being completed for this certificate.
an arms dealer in Shimla (H.P) is charging Rs 5100/- for issuing this certificate and applicants are forwarded to this dealer by police personnel.
corruption or ignorance. one can never tell when it is so common in India

[goodboy_mentor]

In this matter it appears the ignorance and probably pliable nature of some arms license applicants is more responsible.