Applying for an Arms License in India

[goodboy_mentor]

Dear Drifter,

I have illustrated 2 choices to renjith, your case also appears similar. You decide and make a choice. If you know of any better choice, please let the forum know. It will benefit us all.

the reasons being I do not have a threat on my life, no wealth or property also the station inspector had filled out that I don't know how to shoot guns!.

Please forget and take it off from your mind that obtaining an arms license is a matter of your "need" or "threat" or you have to provide a "reason". The RKBA is a human right and the "reason" has been already provided to State by our Constitution. It is matter of your right, not just legal right but also a Constitutional right. It is the State that has to provide YOU a valid "reason" to infringe YOUR right that has been guaranteed by your, mine and our Constitution. If you ever have difficulty understanding this or any objections or doubts occurring in your mind, please feel free to post or send me a PM. For the purpose of this discussion, I am mentioning in brief some parts of the relevant sections of Arms Act 1959 below for illustration and explanation:

CHAPTER III - PROVISIONS RELATING TO LICENCES
13. Grant of licences
1) An application for the grant of a licence under Chapter II shall be made to the licensing authority and shall be in such form, contain such particulars and be accompanied by such fee, if any, as may be prescribed.

(2) On receipt of an application, the licensing authority, after making such inquiry, if any, as it may consider necessary, shall, subject to the other provisions of this Chapter, by order in writing either grant the licence or refuse to grant the same.

(3) The licensing authority shall grant---

(a) a licence under section 3 where the licence is required---

(i) by a citizen of India in respect of a smooth bore gun having a barrel of not less than twenty inches in length to be used for protection or sport or in respect of a muzzle loading gun to be used for bona fide crop protection:

What does word SHALL in the sentence "The licensing authority shall grant---" mean? It means a direction to issue a license provided the applicant is not ineligible for license as per Section 14. It also means that the burden is not on the applicant to provide "reason" to get a license since it has been already taken on his behalf by the Constitution.

14. Refusal of licences
(1)(i)(3) to be for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act;

(2) The licensing authority shall not refuse to grant any licence to any person merely on the ground that such person does not own or possess sufficient property.

(3) Where the licensing authority refuses to grant a licence to any person it shall record in writing the reasons for such refusal and furnish to that person on demand a brief statement of the same unless in any case the licensing authority is of the opinion that it will not be in the public interest to furnish such statement.

What does 14(2) mean? It means that if the applicant is not offending anything in Section 14 then only because he does not have sufficient property cannot become a reason to deny arms license.(Please note: this Section 14(2) was enacted so that the fundamental Right to Property guaranteed our Constitution at the time of enactment of Arms Act 1959 would not be offended)

What does 14(3) mean? It means since it is the question of applicant's fundamental right, the burden to provide "reason" to refuse license lies on the State, so that in case the fundamental right to RKBA guaranteed by our Constitution of the applicant is infringed, the applicant can approach High Court with evidence to get his right enforced which has been guaranteed by our Constitution.(Just as Section 14(2) was enacted to protect the fundamental right to property guaranteed by our Constitution, similarly Section 14(3) was enacted to protect the fundamental right to RKBA under Article 21 of our Constitution)

For complete Chapter III - Provisions Relating to Licenses of Arms Act 1959 please refer: http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india ... r_3_4.html

I humbly request you to read http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 15#p117785 in order to understand your rights.

also the station inspector had filled out that I don't know how to shoot guns!.

How did he come to know of this? Did you say or give any indication to him that you do not have any interest in guns or you are not familiar with guns or you do not know how to shoot guns? Probably when he did not find anything, he is trying to show you as offending the Section 14(1)(i)(3) of Arms Act 1959.

“When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.” - Thomas Paine

[renjith]

Hi goodboy_mentor thanks for ur reply.I understood wat u said.I want to tell one thing, while verification of my back grounds frm special branch for rifle club membership i asked the police officer abt getting license for a weapon.He told me that dont even think for that, it is almost impossible to get license for the weapon.Then i thought if the situation is so tight wat the armouries in kerala do?? No body wil come to buy a new weapon.
I have one doubt in earlier post u said "Self defense is a constitutionally guaranteed right under article 21. But the matter of issue of Arms Licenses has been screwed up by MHA by a illegal/unconstitutional order to all states/UTs dated 31.3.2010 to issue licenses only to VIPs etc. only or to people with "provable" threat.Then if i apply for 12bore in self defense catagorey wil it get work??.If i apply it for sports what may they tell for the rejection as am a member of a rifle club.Please give ur advice.Am not employed, am a M.tech student nw.

[goodboy_mentor]

Then if i apply for 12bore in self defense catagorey wil it get work??.

It appears to me you have not fully understood the ideas, I have expressed at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 15#p117785 I would request you to read it again so that it becomes clearer. There I have mentioned the following:

"What does 14(3) mean? It means since it is the question of applicant's fundamental right, the burden to provide "reason" to refuse license lies on the State, so that in case the fundamental right to RKBA guaranteed by our Constitution of the applicant is infringed, the applicant can approach High Court with evidence to get his right enforced which has been guaranteed by our Constitution.(Just as Section 14(2) was enacted to protect the fundamental right to property guaranteed by our Constitution, similarly Section 14(3) was enacted to protect the fundamental right to RKBA under Article 21 of our Constitution)"

It also means that any special branch/police officer/sub inspector/inspector/SHO/DSP/SP etc. have NO LEGAL role in the "grant" of an arms license to you EXCEPT to search and find in their records, if they have with them, any criminal records on you and send the same to the Licensing Authority. The Licensing Authority "shall" grant you the license UNLESS he has a reason to deny the license. In that case he will have to give you in writing the reasons for refusing license. So that once you get the "reasons" for refusal, you can approach High Court to get your fundamental right enforced. So long you have filled the arms license application honestly without suppressing any relevant facts, do not have any criminal background or you are not mentally unsound, let the licensing authority write whatever it wants, including that the license has been refused due to the MHA order. Legally the MHA order has no place, since it is not only against Arms Act 1959 but also against our Constitution.

[SYED833]

hi goodboymentor/
is high court the next appeal point or is the home secretory of the state if the licence is refused.? had read somewhere that home sec is next appeal..please clarify..
thank you

[goodboy_mentor]

Ideally it would have been the appellate authority(Home Secretary) then High Court. Practically most of the time, it is time wastage, since Home Secretary usually repeats the language of Licensing Authority. But now it makes even more no sense, because nobody can reasonably expect to hear anything different or sensible from Home Secretary, since he is already under the illegal /unconstitutional order of MHA, which he has relayed to all the Licensing Authorities in his State.(copy of that order by MHA that was sent to Home Secretary of every State/Union Territory is attached below).

To get the human rights /fundamental rights guaranteed by Constitution enforced, anybody can approach High Court anytime directly under Article 226. Right of Self Defense and RKBA are both human rights and fundamental rights. Existence of the Right of Self Defense under Article 21 is well established. Though existence of RKBA under Article 21 was confirmed by Hon. Justice Katju in Allahabad High Court. His judgment was overruled by another bench of same high court on the grounds of precedence. I have tried to explain the points he missed in his judgment, causing his judgment being overruled at: http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 15#p117785 After Justice Katju's judgment, probably since no one approached courts, contending with strong logic and evidence that RKBA is guaranteed under Article 21 and is being violated by State, no Court has uttered anything about RKBA. In my opinion precedence is a weak ground. Even Supreme Court overruled its own judgments done on the strength of precedence, saying that if precedence is wrong, that wrong cannot be allowed to continue for ever.

[SYED833]

thank you..so,home secretory appeal is not necessary to go to high court.

[renjith]

Thanks a lot goodboy_mentor , u spend a lot of tym for answering my post.One more question for u.I know i dont even hav a 50% chance to get the license for self defence normally.If i go to high court how much tym it wil take?Any idea abt d expense?.Am planning to go abroad aft finishing my M.tech aft 2 yrs.Am little bit curious abt this.One more tym thanks for ur support as am a new member to this forum.

[goodboy_mentor]

so,home secretory appeal is not necessary to go to high court

Even without that MHA order you could approach High Court, MHA order is now an additional reason in your favor. Believe me, since this MHA order is illegal/unconstitutional, in every likelihood no licensing authority will give in writing that it is denying arms license because of MHA order. They will either keep the file pending indefinitely or give some vague reasons for denying. For the applicants that are approaching for arms licenses, in many cases they are verbally refusing to take new applications citing MHA order. So this is the game going on. In case you have decided to approach High Court, I would request you to, make your lawyer read my post at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 85#p117785 I have updated it today to make things more clear. I had earlier communicated with a couple of lawyers, some of them were not aware about some of concepts, logic, reasoning and facts that have been mentioned in my post. After reading it seemed they were reasonably convinced.

I know i dont even hav a 50% chance to get the license for self defence normally.

As I have earlier mentioned in my reply for you, you have 2 choices either fight begging, or fight with your head held high, you will have to fight for your right. If you do not fight, chances are 0%, if you fight wisely chances are 100%.

If i go to high court how much tym it wil take?Any idea abt d expense?

Only a local lawyer at your place who is practicing in High Court will be able to tell.

Am planning to go abroad aft finishing my M.tech aft 2 yrs.Am little bit curious abt this.

If you are temporarily going abroad, you can get any of your family member who will be in India, endorsed as a retainer on your arms license from your licensing authority. The family member will be able to keep it with him legally. Or you can deposit the firearm with an arms dealer or in local police station and get receipt for same.
If you are permanently going abroad, you can apply to Licensing Authority giving 45 day notice, on the prescribed form for selling/transfer/gifting your arms. Once you get permission, you can sell/transfer/gift as the case maybe, to another license holder, the license holder can also be your family member.

[renjith]

Hats off to u "goodboy_mentor"

[SYED833]

@ renjith.
how long does it take to file a writ petition in high court?--25 minutes..
how long does it take the high court to dispose off the said writ petition?--6 to 25 months..
the expression on our faces after we see the lawyers bill?--priceless..

but,, if you want a weapon in this country and if the DM refuses,,then judiciary is the only way to go..

@ goodboymentor,,
i did show my advocate,the material you have put up and he seems confident that when and if my application gets rejected,,we can move fast..and he has a suggestion for you..quote" if he is not a lawyer already,may be he should consider becoming one.",and i totally agree with him..
thank you..

[goodboy_mentor]

@ renjith
Thank you renjith

@syed833

Thank you for your opinion and also please say my thanks to your advocate on my behalf, whenever you have opportunity to communicate with him. I am not a lawyer, yes I do respect his and your views on this matter, I am also thinking similarly.

I would like to add if I am not going wrong, that probably licensing authority will not give any reasons and keep the file pending indefinitely until they are able to find reasons to deny as I have tried to illustrate below:

1) As desired by Section 13 of Arms Act 1959 there is no specific time period(it is talking of only prescribed time, not prescribing any specific time period) provided to the licensing authority to issue of arms license if they do not find "any" reasons to deny under Section 14 within any specific time frame. The burden to decide the specific time frame lies with licensing authority in "good faith"(as allowed to them by Section 40) .

2) As desired by Section 14 of Arms Act 1959 they have been put under unlimited burden to deny for "any" reasons, hence they honestly keep on searching for "any" reasons to deny but unfortunately in most of the cases they do not know, when to come out of the unlimited burden of section 14 by taking help of "good faith"(as allowed to them by Section 40) and enter the Section 13 to go ahead and issue the arms license. I am attaching a copy of Arms Act 1959 below for reference.

Because of this reason as described above, people cannot endlessly wait, since Section 13 of Arms Act is not prescribing any specific time period and are compelled to approach the High Court to get a writ issued, directing the licensing authority to "decide" whatever needs to be done as per Section 13 & 14 of Arms Act 1959 within the time period as prescribed in writ by court. When asked by court the lawyer of licensing authority says to court that the applicant has unnecessarily approached court.(because they are confused by the burdens of Section 13, 14 and do not know how to take help of Section 40 to get relief from that burden as explained above in 1) and 2)). Courts direct the licensing authority to issue the license(without adjudicating on merits of case if LA has not given any written reason for rejection, with adjudicating on the merits of case if LA has given a written reason for rejection) by providing a prescribing a specific time period for that "prescribed time" in Section 13 of Arms Act 1959 like in next 3-4 months within the direction itself. This is the game of Section 13, 14 and 40 which happens with almost every applicant. I am enclosing one such writ petition below with this post, where High Court is not adjudicating on merits of case but providing a specified time period within which LA has to issue the license or reject giving reasons.

In short, if LA has given reasons for rejection of license, applicant will need to make one trip to High Court. If LA is delaying the application and not giving any reasons in writing, applicant may have to make one trip to High Court to get a specific time period for "prescribed time" in Section 13 of Arms Act or may also need to make second trip to High Court, if within the specific time period provided by High Court, LA finds that applicant is disqualified as per Section 14 of Arms Act 1959.

In my opinion Section 13 needs to have a specific time prescribed in it and Section 40 needs to go since LA do not know how and when to use it.

In my opinion, MHAI order sent to the Licensing Authorities under the cover of "policy" is basically conveying two messages or rather policies:

a) As many of the Licensing Authorities are already confused by Sections 13, 14 and 40, this policy has added more confusion. Now some of them are verbally refusing to accept new license applications that do not confirm to the policy, thus eliminating more than 99.99% of license applicants even without evaluating the merits of application as per Arms Act 1959.

b) Those applications that have been acknowledged as received but do not confirm to the policy, get delayed as usual by Sections 13, 14 and 40 as explained above. Additionally this policy is adding more confusion to already existing confusion.

I think you can also show this additional reason to your advocate, if he thinks fit it can also be added and rather waiting anymore you can approach High Court immediately under Article 226 and show the following Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Constitution getting affected:

1) RKBA under Article 21 as explained at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 85#p117785 is not getting enjoyed.

2) Since RKBA is not getting enjoyed, Right to Self Defense under Article 21 is also getting very severely affected.

3) Since RKBA is not getting enjoyed, rights under Article 19(1)d are also getting severely getting affected. Example: If for any reason like you have to take family members especially children or ladies to hospital for emergency at night or you have to travel at night with children and ladies, life of all people including yourself will be at the mercy of criminal elements since RKBA is not getting enjoyed. Hence you are also being forced to avoid enjoying your rights under Article 19(1)d.

4) Since RKBA is not getting enjoyed, rights under Article 19(1)a are also getting affected, you are not able to openly speak or express your opinions against various types of dangerous persons since you will not be able to defend yourself or your near and dear ones if they decide to take the law in their own hands.

[Risala]

but,, if you want a weapon in this country and if the DM refuses,,then judiciary is the only way to go..

thank you..

The judiciary can only and will only (if your petition is admitted and not dismissed) refer the case back to the concerned authorities to reconsider the case as per the provisions laid down.
That means that you are still going to have to satisfy the concerned department with the grounds on which your licence should be granted.

The courts will not give directions to the licensing authorities to issue you a licence,sometime back in Delhi an applicant whose licence was not granted approached the HC....they dismissed his petition in the first hearing stating that the licencing authority was the competent authority for the grant or refusal of a licence.

Good Boy Mentor

[/quote]
As I have earlier mentioned in my reply for you, you have 2 choices either fight begging, or fight with your head held high, you will have to fight for your right. If you do not fight, chances are 0%, if you fight wisely chances are 100%.
[/quote]

Can you pl elaborate on the 100% chance

[SYED833]

@ SANJAY..
i think i read in a recent high court judgement of the andhra high court,.the court actually directed the DM to issue a licence..this was when the application got rejected and the person filed a writ..i may be wrong here,.but that is what i remember..any way,,we dont have any other options other than the judiciary..

[goodboy_mentor]

The judiciary can only and will only (if your petition is admitted and not dismissed) refer the case back to the concerned authorities to reconsider the case as per the provisions laid down.

Even if the writ is dismissed, judiciary will refer that case back with directions to licensing authority to dispose of the case within a specified time frame without adjudicating on the merits of case. This in itself is a big relief for applicant since within the specified time frame, he will either get the license or he will get a written refusal so that he can approach High Court for getting his rights enforced. Please refer attached copy of such writ in my previous post above.

The courts will not give directions to the licensing authorities to issue you a licence,

Courts will give directions to the licensing authority to dispose of the case within specific time frame without adjudicating on the merits of the case if reasons not provided by licensing authority. This is a big relief to applicant since he will get a specific time frame within which he will get license or will get a written refusal so that he can approach High Court to get his rights enforced. Please refer attached copy of such writ in my previous post above.

The courts will not give directions to the licensing authorities to issue you a licence,

High Court does give directions to licensing authorities to issue the license if not satisfied with the reasons provided by licensing authority else directs licensing authority to take a decision within the specified time period. Please refer my reply 2) and 1) respectively to Syed below.

sometime back in Delhi an applicant whose licence was not granted approached the HC....they dismissed his petition in the first hearing stating that the licencing authority was the competent authority for the grant or refusal of a licence.

Either the applicant had suppressed some facts from licensing authority in his license application or was genuinely not eligible for arms license as per Section 14. If the applicant is not disqualified as per Section 14 of Arms Act, and case for applicant is properly presented and argued by advocate, there is no reason why he will be denied license.

Can you pl elaborate on the 100% chance

100% chance means if you are not disqualified as per Sections 14 of Arms Act 1959, willing to chase the matter wisely and not shy of approaching High Court for help. No applicant under any circumstances get arms license if he is genuinely disqualified as per Section 14 of Arms Act 1959. In order to understand the concept in detail please read http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 85#p117785 and my previous post above.

i think i read in a recent high court judgement of the andhra high court,.the court actually directed the DM to issue a licence..this was when the application got rejected and the person filed a writ..i may be wrong here,.but that is what i remember..any way,,we dont have any other options other than the judiciary..

You are not wrong, you are absolutely right. I know the case you are talking about, copy of the same is also in this website. High Courts direct Licensing Authorities basically in 2 ways:

1) If licensing authority is causing unreasonable delay, without giving any written reason and if applicant approaches High Court since the matter is related to his fundamental rights. High Courts directs Licensing Authority to dispose of the matter in specified time frame without deciding whether license should be granted or not. By this kind of order, if the licensing authority feels that applicant is not disqualified as per Section 14 of Arms Act applicant gets license else he gets a written refusal from licensing authority. I have written about this kind of scenario in my post above and also attached a sample of such writ.

2) If Licensing Authority has given a written reason to applicant, and applicant approaches High Court, then on the basis of written reasons for refusal provided by licensing authority, decides if applicant is eligible to get license or not. If High Court finds that reasons provided by Licensing Authority are not satisfactory, then it directs licensing authority to grant the license withing a specified time frame. This is the type of case you are telling.

[Risala]

Good Boy Mentor

There is nothing new that you are saying that I have already not stated in my post.

Per the new policy the courts do not have to give any directions since the policy itself mandates that all applications be disposed off within 60 days or atleast the police verification since that determines whether you are elegible for a lic or not.

Now you can go on about Article 21 etc and how individual rights are being infringed,but guess what in the real world shit happens,in our country rights to gun ownership are at the discretion of the state,let us learn to accept that,and deal with it.

The case I have cited was out in the papers…..the judiciary for the most part does not like to interfere with the role of the executive,so let us not push this running to the court thingy too far.The few cases in court wrt grant /addition of fire arm etc that are documented on this board haven’t really met with any outcome as yet.though they have been languishing in the courts for years.Sure in a genuine case there can be a positive result,but that would be considered an exception rather than a rule.
In any case even that will also take a couple of years given our justice system apart from the legal expenses involved.

I don’t know of any such case,if you do pl do share the details it will help many a member here who is running form pillar to post.


While I admire you for your patience and tenacity wrt RKBA…folks here really need to smell the coffee …that is if they are looking to apply for a licence and get one.