LETS GO TO HIGH COURT TOGETHER , FOR ARMS IMPORT !

[sudhirkh]

FRIENDS, THANKS A LOT FOR YOUR REPLY.
I SAW MANY QUESTION AND ANSWERS

SOME POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR SO THERE WONT BE ANY DOUBTS :-

* Govt. cannot defend by saying import will bring US gun culture.
* also Govt. cannot defend by saying it will increase crime rate.

If Govt. is issuing license then this is for sure, that much guns will be there, may be through IMPORT ( if allowed ) or from IOF ( for sure )


also as per survey it is already stated by Police departments that Arms used in crimes are 98% illegal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOW WHAT I WANT IS SERIOUS INPUT FROM YOU GUYS, HOW MANY OF YOU ARE READY TO FORM A GROUP AND FILE A PIL FOR ALLOWING GUN IMPORT.

WE WILL HIRE BEST LAWYER AND FILE POWERFUL PIL. UNITY IS STRENGTH I KNOW THIS.

[renjith747]

SOME POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR SO THERE WONT BE ANY DOUBTS :-

* Govt. cannot defend by saying import will bring US gun culture.
* also Govt. cannot defend by saying it will increase crime rate.

If Govt. is issuing license then this is for sure, that much guns will be there, may be through IMPORT ( if allowed ) or from IOF ( for sure )

also as per survey it is already stated by Police departments that Arms used in crimes are 98% illegal.

I said those points that it may have a little chance in court for defending the case, all in all its not logical as we all know.The main aim of the government is to restrict import of gun so they will try their level best to defend our case if we go for a PIL.

We have to foresee the possible questions which may be a defensive in court and we have to do proper home work.First of all before submitting a PIL you have to come into a conclusion that why import of fire arms is needed?.You should say only convincing points in the court because you are challenging against a government policy.

My personal suggestion is that submit a PIL stating the need is for shooting sports and you need foreign match rifles/pistols for target practice.Tell them only renowned shots are permitted to import weapons now.If you want to purchase a match pistol/rifle from them you have to shell out a great fortune.they will ask you 4 to 5 times of the actual cost of the weapon some times(purely my perception).The end result of that is eventhough you pay much from actual foreign rates you will will end up in second hand goods.you only get used and worn out weapons by this.

If you dont have a good weapon to practice how will you become a renowned shot?(we can tell this for our defense).You should consult our seniors in this forum to make the PIL a water tight one.Wish you all success.

Regards
Renjith

[goodboy_mentor]

I said those points that it may have a little chance in court for defending the case, all in all its not logical as we all know.

What is so illogical about it? Is going against the Constitution and law logical? Or is the Constitution or law illogical?

Article 21 of Constitution guarantees Life and personal Liberty. Foreign travel and personal baggage items also constitute part of life and personal liberty. There is already Supreme Court judgment related to foreign travel in Suresh Nanda Vs. CBI that says foreign travel is part of life and liberty under Article 21. Exactly because of personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21, Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 allows personal liberty for arms license holders to bring in or take out arms and ammunition for personal use without separate import/export license.

DGFT is going just opposite to Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959. Is it logical and legally sustainable in court to go against Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 and thus violating the personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution? Please give a logical answer to justify violating the fundamental right guaranteed by Constitution and provisions of law.

DGFT is going against Section 11(2)(u) of The Customs Act, 1962. It says about the prevention of the contravention of any law for the time being in force. In this matter it is contravening against Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959. Is it logical and legally sustainable in court to violate Section 11(2)(u) of The Customs Act, 1962? Please give a logical answer to justify violating the above provision of law.

DGFT's job is not about maintaining law and order or maintaining internal security. Its job is to regulate import/export from commercial perspective. What commercial interest is being served by violating Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 and Section 11(2)(u) of The Customs Act, 1962?

As far as I can remember reading on this forum, the firearms were officially put in restricted list of import policy not due to any law and order reason. It was because some arms license holders were found to be lawfully selling the firearms to other arms license holders after bringing them in from abroad. And this reason is not a reasonable or logical reason to violate the existing provisions of law including the Constitutionally guaranteed liberty. There are many simpler and reasonable ways to tackle this problem.

The main aim of the government is to restrict import of gun so they will try their level best to defend our case if we go for a PIL.

Rather than speculating, the aim of government(DGFT in this case) can be ascertained by doing an RTI.

[nagarifle]

Arms Act allows one to sell their firearms even if its imported ones or not. thus the DgFt should no,t can not prevent one from selling arms as laid down in the arms act/rules,

surly by preventing one from selling is going against ones liverbirty?

how can two different ie arms act/rules and some thing else says different [dgft]? or over rides the act etc.

since one deals with arms and the other with imports, and as long as arms are imported under the LAW then they should be sold as per the law ie arms act/rules.

[renjith747]

Instead of locally manufactured firearm, how will an imported firearm in hands of an arms license holder increase crime or cause security threat?

It is not true if we think in a rational manner but they can defend by this point as always by saying if import is allowed to all civilians on behalf of their valid gun license many people will purchase imported firearms and get into gun culture like in US.Government is not ready to give civilians quality standard firearms,they fear that people will cause threat to the nation if they get so

SOME POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR SO THERE WONT BE ANY DOUBTS :-

* Govt. cannot defend by saying import will bring US gun culture.
* also Govt. cannot defend by saying it will increase crime rate.

If Govt. is issuing license then this is for sure, that much guns will be there, may be through IMPORT ( if allowed ) or from IOF ( for sure )

also as per survey it is already stated by Police departments that Arms used in crimes are 98% illegal.

I said those points that it may have a little chance in court for defending the case, all in all its not logical as we all know.The main aim of the government is to restrict import of gun so they will try their level best to defend our case if we go for a PIL.

I said those points that it may have a little chance in court for defending the case, all in all its not logical as we all know.

What is so illogical about it? Is going against the Constitution and law logical? Or is the Constitution or law illogical?

GBM what i mean that the government can /may defend our PIL by saying import will bring gun culture to india like in United States.If people get modern weapons like semi autos (.22 semi autos is allowed for members of a rifle club) it will cause threat to society and government.I know like you these all are illogical if the government say so.

Out of my curiosity am asking what will be the rate of success if a PIL is given to open the import??



Regards
Renjith

[goodboy_mentor]

GBM what i mean that the government can /may defend our PIL by saying import will bring gun culture to india like in United States.

This is a weak defense rather a personal biased, prejudiced conjecture and can be easily defeated. What is wrong about gun culture in US? What is so good about the lack of gun culture i.e. victim culture in India? Moreover we are not approaching courts of law to decide about suitability of cultures of countries.

We are approaching courts for justice, for remedy of the violation of fundamental rights and for resolving the controversy in substantial question of law. Why it is the substantial question of law in this matter? Because the legal position is very clear on account of the express provisions of law. The express provisions of law are personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 and Section 11(2)(u) of The Customs Act 1962. But DGFT is going against all these and doing injustice.

If people get modern weapons like semi autos (.22 semi autos is allowed for members of a rifle club) it will cause threat to society and government.

Again this is just a conjecture full of personal biases and prejudices with no connection to facts or laws in question. Police also has lawful semi autos, are they threat to society? How can lawful semi autos in hands of law abiding citizens be threat to society? Police and citizens are equal before the Constitution and the law and both have same semi autos lawfully. Where is the problem? The problem is in the personal belief system and mindset.

Out of my curiosity am asking what will be the rate of success if a PIL is given to open the import??

Instead of PIL, a writ would be a better option. If the matter is taken up in proper manner there are good chances of success.

[renjith747]

What is wrong about gun culture in US? What is so good about the lack of gun culture i.e. victim culture in India? Moreover we are not approaching courts of law to decide about suitability of cultures of countries.

GBM am not against the gun culture of United States i love the policies of that country.I like to even go to united states some day to fire some rounds especially long range weapons.100% with your comments.

[sudhirkh]

FRIENDS :- THIS IS A FORUM , NOW A HIGH COURT.

BEFORE GOING TO HIGH COURT WE WILL HIRE A GOOD LAWYER SO HE WILL PLAN THE PIL AND BEFORE SUBMITTING IT WE WILL DISUCSS. SO INSTEAD OF WASTING TIME HERE, HOW MANY OF YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED TO FILE PIL IN A GROUP. HOW MUCH IS A REASONABLE AMOUNT ONE CAN SHARE FOR CONTRIBUTING IN FILING PIL ?

[adhaw]

Hello IFGians,

Good evening!

I have been a silent observer of what’s happening in our forum and please excuse me for not making any valuable contribution to the forum other than telling you all I got myself an air rifle! That was very pathetic just imagine getting a air rifle makes me so happy that feel I have just lowered my level of achievement because of the legalities involved in getting a good or world class air gun and I wanted all IFGians to know I fully support right to bear arms legally and using it Sensibly.
I am all for the Writ/PIL and please let me know about the amount involved and I will pay it as soon as you all let me know just make sure we hire a very good lawyer and get it done for all the law abiding citizens for Sporting , crop ,property and personal protection .

Shoot safe !
Adhaw

[sudhirkh]

FRIENDS,
I am in touch with a leading lawyers based in nagpur, they will charge around 3 lakhs, but instead of going for them doing gambling i decided to try with a good guy who is reasonable. I am ready to contribute 25000/0 and i think total 50K is enough

[goodboy_mentor]

Very good. It means if there are only five more volunteers, they will have to contribute only Rs. 5000 each. Pretty reasonable.

This is the right thread for joining for those who say "money is not an issue" when they want to buy imported firearms. For example this thread http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=18248

Though not related with import of arms, there is a writ petition going on in Nagpur before the Nagpur Division Bench of Bombay High Court. It appears to be related to that illegal MHA Policy. The case can be tracked at Bombay High Court website(bombayhighcourt.nic.in). The case details are Nagpur Bench, Criminal Writ Petition No. 336 of 2012, Shri Prabhat S/O Janak Garg .vs. State of Maharashtra through Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs, State of Maharashtra through Commissioner of Police, The Collector, Office of Collector/District Magistrate. Mr. Y.V. Nayyar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. M.K. Pathan, A.P.P. for respondents.

[amitmeerut]

i am with u

amit

[spin_drift]

i am in...

[Pradyumna]

I am with you.

[inplainsight]

Count me in.