Rights Retainer in Arms License in form III for Protection

[renjith747]

I have a shotgun license which got recently.At the time of issue of my license i asked the section clerk about adding a "retainer" in my license but he told me that they allow retainer only for self-protection not for sports.Anybody do have a retainer for SPORTS?.

Rule 13(1) of Indian Arms Rules, 1962 is as follows:
13. Of retainers.—(1) When the owner of any arms or ammunition licensed in Form III
applies for permitting his agent, relative or employee to possess or carry any of the arms
or ammunition covered by the licence for sport, protection or display, on his behalf,
whether in attendance on him or not, and in circumstances different from those
mentioned in the proviso to Section 3, such agent, relative or employee may, if the
licensing authority considers it fit, be shown as a retainer by entering his name and other
particulars in Column 6 of the owner's licence in Form III.

Its not possible for me to add a retainer in my license now , but 13(1) Arms rules 1962 promising it also.Suggestions please?

Regards
Renjith

[goodboy_mentor]

When the law is on your side, fight the matter skillfully to its logical conclusion. What other suggestions one can give?

[mundaire]

"Retainer" - has been a part of the Indian Arms laws since British times, the reasons for this proviso are fairly straight forward:

1) In British times, the largest percentage of licenses were issued to feudal lords, who maintained a large number of retainers, some armed BUT most NOT. The cost of firearms/ any manufactured goods with respect to earning capacity was quite skewed at that time, therefore it was irrational to expect armed retainers to purchase & maintain their firearms on their own earnings. Therefore there was a need for a proviso to ensure that these feudal lords loyal to the crown could maintain armed retainers, as well as to ensure that the feudal's were responsible for their retainers actions.

2) Of course, even after independence, while the cost of ALL OTHER manufactured goods went down with respect to purchasing power, the cost of (legal) firearms has remained very high due market imperfections introduced & maintained by successive governments. So while there are no longer any feudal lords, each with their train of 'retainers', there are many instances in which firearms may be purchased by one party (for example a bank) for possession/ use by their employees in the discharge of their duties.

3) A firearm may be owned by one member of the family, while another may also wish to/ need to carry it without having to incur the (extortionate) expense to acquiring another firearm. In this case too the proviso of being a 'retainer' comes in handy.

DISCLAIMER: The above is merely my own personal reading of the law & the genesis of certain parts of it and as such should not be considered as legal advice.

Cheers!
Abhijeet