Exemption from depositing Arms during elections

[goodboy_mentor]

Arms Act 1959 or Arms Rules 1962 does not say anything about "specific" quantity of ammunition like 5, 25, 100 etc., it is left for the licensing authorities to "decide". Arms Rules 1962 Form III talks about Quantity and description of each kind ammunition. Maximum to be possessed at any one time. Maximum purchasable during the year.

[sa_ali]

I am taking the thread lil off, but i have one request to goodboy_mentor and other gurus also, that can we have 1 thread where we can give detail on this also, that normal person, which is non renowned shot person can have keep how much ammo per annually.

[goodboy_mentor]

Please do not consider me any kind of "guru" etc., I am just any ordinary person like anybody

can we have 1 thread where we can give detail on this also, that normal person, which is non renowned shot person can have keep how much ammo per annually.

I am not able to understand your question, if you want to start another thread, of course you may start another thread. Licensing Authorities have been delegated discretionary powers, regardless whether someone is ordinary citizen or renowned shot, they can write on license to allow to have 1 cartridge annually or 10,000 cartridges annually. No law is specifying any "specific" number of cartridges to be written on license.

[sa_ali]

No law is specifying any "specific" number of cartridges to be written on license.

Oh oki, i got it wrong then.

[ajayplahane]

Friends,
Pardon me if I am wrong. I was Dy Distt election officer for three years. This all is going on a very wrong track.
Pl go to eci.gov.in.Then to GE2009 then Compendium of instructions on conduct of elections- Volume- IIIthen B – MAINTENANCE OF LAW & ORDER AND DEPLOYMENT OF SECURITY FORCES / HOME GUARDS then Circular no. 67 464/96-L&O/PLN-I dated 13.03.1996 General Election/Bye- Elections – restrictions on possession of arms during elections.pages- 129-130. This circular, and no other circular is in operation as on today. It clearly says that review of only those, released on bail, having history of criminal ofences and those previously invoolved in rioting,(ONLY ILLUSTRATIVE AND NOT EXHAUSTIVE) has to be taken, and obviously, out of them only, those, whose weapon is to be got deposited, are to be chosen. So, no question of even reviewing the others arises( Except where lines typed in bold are taken otherwise to review all.). It is only those darpok collectors, who, either in a zeal to please the ECI guys or in a manner not to attract its anger,( if something goes wrong) ; take a decision to collect weapons of all license holders. Election Commission has nowhere said anything like that. But it has been shrewd enough not to reiterate its meaning that everybody's weapons should not be got deposited ! Diplomatic, no ? At many places, police authorities use this opportunity to extort money from weapon holders. And many times, they put forward an alibi that this is an opportunity to screen the licenses and the weapons !
What to do then ? In my openion,
Get the circular, go to the police head or the DM and Distt Election Officer, and ask if any other instructions contrary to this are there. Take care to have at least 20 to 30 license holders go together. If thay dont listen,
show them the orders of different high courts. You should be wise enough to challenge their common sense, but not their ego.Fact that illegal weapon holders exist in thousands, whom they should target, and not the licensees, who dont dare to take law in their hands,should be embosssed.
Still no effect, then I am sorry, U are yelling at wrong ears. You have to go to the high court only.

Ajay

[savage]

thx ajay sir

[goodboy_mentor]

Ajay Sir, you are not at all wrong, rather your reply is correct, concise and to the point, explaining the real problem. You have provided practical and workable solution to the problem faced by arms license holders during elections.

[sat]

If NAGRI could just have those sections removed so that we have no limit on the number of arms and the quantity of ammo that would be fantastic!

Would be great but unlikely, I have heard murmurs, also from government employee that the authorities are comfortable with no of firearms owned by public being less than what the authorities (police etc) have in the district. I had a hearty laugh and this was before Egypt revolt. What about all the unlicensed firearms? I hope in the 'count' they are including all the muzzle loader & 410 muskets that are present in some police strong rooms else we have have had it...

[goodboy_mentor]

Would be great but unlikely

I think just the opposite and it is only a matter of time, until people do not know that arms are a fundamental right of people under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. I have tried to explain this at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 15#p129992

[Pranab7]

Hi to All,
I am having an question in regard of the said topic.
If someone (like me) do not get his address changed in records that he has shifted his residence as mentioned in the license what would be its implications.

1. At the time of elections
2. At the time of Sec. 144

I have shifted from my last recorded address to a different district all together, hence to escape from the depositing the arm during elections or Sec.144 is it good to continue like that or should I go head and get my present address updated and report to my nearest police station that I am now in there jurisdiction.
Kindly educated me in this regard.

[goodboy_mentor]

1. At the time of elections

Rather than living under fear and with idea that everyone has to deposit arms during elections, please read and understand the order of Election Commission. It is not about everybody having to deposit arms. If we read the following http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 45#p130560 it becomes clear that arms of only those released on bail, having history of criminal offenses, those previously involved in rioting etc. their review is to be done. Out of this catagory, whose arms are to be deposited, is to be decided. Therefore the question of asking everybody to deposit arms does not arise. This has also been clarified at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 38#p133624

2. At the time of Sec. 144

This matter has been discussed at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 81#p130829

I personally do not appreciate the idea of unnecessarily playing hide and seek when you are not on the wrong side of law.

[Pranab7]

Thanks for the advise.

[nagarifle]

read this and see what happened to one gent

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31665 of 2002
Pravu Nath Pandey Vs. State of U.P. & others
Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
Despite time having been granted, no counter affidavit has yet been filed and thus this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself without the counter affidavit.
It is the case of the petitioner that he was granted arms licence on 10.3.1993 by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, Nagaland. During the election, in the year 1997, the petitioner was required to deposit his licenced gun. Since the respondents did not return the gun of the petitioner after the election, despite the petitioner having filed several representations, the petitioner has thus filed this writ petition with the prayer for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 2 and 3 to release the arms licence of the petitioner as well as his gun which was deposited by him on 30.10.1997 with the respondent no. 3.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction that in case if, with regard to his grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before respondent no. 2, the District Magistrate, Ballia alongwith a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent either himself or through any other competent officer, duly authorized by him, in accordance with law by a speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the same.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
Dt/-7.11.2005
PS

[Pranab7]

Ok, sir
Please correct me if wrong.
After going through the order and being a lawyer myself, it seems that it's better to get the records changed rather ignore it.
Moreover as per my understanding I'll get stuck at the time of my renewal.
Please advise.

[goodboy_mentor]

it seems that it's better to get the records changed rather ignore it.

I did not understand your question.

Moreover as per my understanding I'll get stuck at the time of my renewal.

Why would you get stuck at the renewel?