legal possibility for arms import?

[renjith747]

goodboy_mentor"

Since arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, that is exactly why the Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 clearly acknowledges that an arms license holder has the right to bring into, or take out of India, arms or ammunition in reasonable quantities for his own private use.

10. Licence for import and export of arms, etc.

(1) No person shall bring into, or take out of, India by sea, land or air any arms or ammunition unless he holds in this behalf a licence issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder:

Provided that---

(a) a person who is entitled by virtue of this Act or any other lay for the time being in force to have, or is not prohibited by this Act or such other law from having, in his possession any arms or ammunition, may without a licence in this behalf bring into, or take out of, India such arms or ammunition in reasonable quantities for his own private use;

This post was dead for a long time.I am quoting the words of GBM from the thread of "imported ammo".

Even though section 10 of arms act 1959 tells about import and export of arms by a licensed citizen of india why the import is banned since 1986???

Do this restriction remains same all the time?.It is a partiality that only renowned shooters can make import.
Is it possible for NAGRI to find a solution for the ban of import of arms?.I strongly believe in RKBA like all our members at the same time we also give importance in taking necessary steps to remove restriction for import of arms by a law abiding citizen of india.This will bring an end to the monopoly of IOF.

What is the current update regarding this matter?.Don't we need imported and top quality fire arms?.Brothers in arms share your opinions.....


Regards
Renjith

[goodboy_mentor]

Even though section 10 of arms act 1959 tells about import and export of arms by a licensed citizen of india why the import is banned since 1986???

Import of firearms is not banned. It is just that DGFT has put in an import policy for firearms that is against Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959. Whatever might have been the reasons behind it, those reasons cannot override Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. There are only two solutions to this problem, either the government corrects the import policy so that it respects Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 or one files a writ in High Court or Supreme Court to get the same done.

[varunik]

Since arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, that is exactly why the Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 clearly acknowledges that an arms license holder has the right to bring into, or take out of India, arms or ammunition in reasonable quantities for his own private use.

well, Article 19 says,

Central Government Act
Article 19 in The Constitution Of India 1949
19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc
(1) All citizens shall have the right
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) to form associations or unions;
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and
(f) omitted
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business
(2) Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause ( 1 ) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence
(3) Nothing in sub clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause
(4) Nothing in sub clause (c) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order or morality, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause
(5) Nothing in sub clauses (d) and (e) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the rights conferred by the said sub clauses either in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe
(6) Nothing in sub clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause, and, in particular, nothing in the said sub clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to,
(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise



So how is Article 19 supporting arms ownership?

[goodboy_mentor]

It is just a trickery of playing with the words that has been done in Article 19 that confuses most people.

What for "and" is used in Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(e). It is used to join two rights. Question of saying "without arms" does not arise unless Article 19 acknowledges arms as a fundamental right.

Assemble peaceably and without arms is one combination of rights that has been explicitly enumerated in Article 19(1)(b). Another combination of unenumerated rights is to assemble peaceably and with arms. If you search this forum, will find that have explained this matter in detail in some other threads.

[renjith747]

So how is Article 19 supporting arms ownership?

The laws are very hard to digest for a common man and is very tricky.Thank god, our forum have experts who interprets that in a good manner.

Regards
Renjith

[varunik]

Why can they write laws in layman language ?

[renjith747]

I am thinking of getting data available till date with Crime Records Bureau under Home Ministry using RTI, as to what percentage of violent crimes(including terrorism) have been committed by "licensed" firearms AND what percentage of violent crimes(including terrorism) have been committed using "unlicensed" firearms/arms not required "licensing". I am willing to join others in the forum interested in filling PIL against this stupid "license" raj & import restrictions.

Sir any update regarding this?

[goodboy_mentor]

RTI not needed as Crime Records Bureau had put the data related to all violent crimes on its website.

[spin_drift]

Why can they write laws in layman language ?

If they did that then they will not be able to get away with the things they are able to get away with now