JUSTICE M.KATJU OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
On 12th March 1993, gave a judgement on para-15.
"The position of our country today is that unfortunately the law & order enforcing are not providing adequate protection to the citizens. The result is that the decent, respectable and law-abiding citizens are defenceless if a gangster or criminal enters one's house with a weapon he can loot the entire property there, dishonour the women and do as he pleases because an unarmed person cannot be reasonably expected to put up resistance against a person carrying a gun or revolver. If on the other hand, one has a revolver or pistol with him he can put up resistance against such criminals. In my opinion, if the Arms Act is interpreted in the manner indicated hereafter by me,Crimes will go down and will not go up as some people think. In these days the situation is that the criminals are armed with licenced or un-licenced guns whereas the law abiding citizens are not easily granted an arms licence,and thus they are at the mercy of the Criminals."
HK,
GRANT OF FIRE-ARMS LICENCES.
-
penpusher
Re: GRANT OF FIRE-ARMS LICENCES.
Parts of the order were overturned by a superior bench
-
hock ann
- Almost at nirvana
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:55 pm
- Location: Dibrugarh
CONCLUDING THE HON'ABLE JUSTICE M.KATJU HAS OBSERVED 
"the Supreme Court took a narrow view of Article 21 in earlier cases. In the A.K.Gopalan case, the Apex Court had held that the words "procedure established by law" in article 21 are not to be given the wide and fluid maening of the expression 'due process of law' in the U.S.Constitution, but means only state made statutory law. The Apex Court had held in that case that Article 19 & 21 are mutually exclusive, and hence the reasonability test in Article 19 is not to be applied when construing a law from the point of view of article 21, and as long as there was some statutory law which prescribed a procedure for depriving a person of his life & liberty, it meets the requirement of article 21. Thus Article 21 was construed as a guarantee against executive action unsupported by law;
But in subsequent cases,the supreme Court has widened the scope of Article 21 and it is now settled that though article 21 is couched in negative language, it confers positive rights to life & liberty;the word 'life' in Article 21 means a life of dignity as a civilised human being,and not just animal survival and finally the procedure of depriving a person of his life & liberty, must be reasonable, fair and just."
HK,
"the Supreme Court took a narrow view of Article 21 in earlier cases. In the A.K.Gopalan case, the Apex Court had held that the words "procedure established by law" in article 21 are not to be given the wide and fluid maening of the expression 'due process of law' in the U.S.Constitution, but means only state made statutory law. The Apex Court had held in that case that Article 19 & 21 are mutually exclusive, and hence the reasonability test in Article 19 is not to be applied when construing a law from the point of view of article 21, and as long as there was some statutory law which prescribed a procedure for depriving a person of his life & liberty, it meets the requirement of article 21. Thus Article 21 was construed as a guarantee against executive action unsupported by law;But in subsequent cases,the supreme Court has widened the scope of Article 21 and it is now settled that though article 21 is couched in negative language, it confers positive rights to life & liberty;the word 'life' in Article 21 means a life of dignity as a civilised human being,and not just animal survival and finally the procedure of depriving a person of his life & liberty, must be reasonable, fair and just."
HK,
-
Risala
- Shooting true
- Posts: 916
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:24 am
- Location: Khurpatal
Re: GRANT OF FIRE-ARMS LICENCES.
I think quoting judgements before the issuing authority will only be detrimental to the intrests of the applicant as our bureaucracy doesnt take it too lightly when a finger is pointed towards their ignorance.
Often giving self defense as a reason for issuing an arms lic,gives the lic authority enough latitude and the right to determine the perception of the level of threat,this holds true for most big cities re metros.
Only recently in Delhi a rejected application approached the court,he came back dejected from there too and the High Court dismissed the petition in the first hearing.
In the real world you got to take it by the ear and walk the talk.
Often giving self defense as a reason for issuing an arms lic,gives the lic authority enough latitude and the right to determine the perception of the level of threat,this holds true for most big cities re metros.
Only recently in Delhi a rejected application approached the court,he came back dejected from there too and the High Court dismissed the petition in the first hearing.
In the real world you got to take it by the ear and walk the talk.
-
hock ann
- Almost at nirvana
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:55 pm
- Location: Dibrugarh
Even in kolkata where the licenceing authority is the Comm. of police. we listen to some cases of the Lal Bazar arms section where the licencees face the problems to obtain fire-arms licences & some times during the renewal period also. So should we presume that those places in India where the licenceing authority is Police there Law abiding citizens face difficulties in obtaining a licence ? But in my State the District magistrates who is the issuing authority calls for police report with even 2/3 reminders and the citizens gets licences if there is no criminal back grounds.
HK,
HK,
-
hock ann
- Almost at nirvana
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:55 pm
- Location: Dibrugarh
RIGHT OF APPEAL-DENIED :-As per Section 18 (1) of the Arms Act, 1959 makes provision for appeal by an aggrieved person if :-
(a) his application for grant of licence has been refused.
(b) any condition of his licence has been varied; and
(c)his licence has been suspended or cancelled.
Very Surprisingly, no provision for appeal seems to have been made in the Arms Act, in respect of the victim of the aforesaid condition of his licence, howsoever, genuine his grievance may be.
HK,
(a) his application for grant of licence has been refused.
(b) any condition of his licence has been varied; and
(c)his licence has been suspended or cancelled.
Very Surprisingly, no provision for appeal seems to have been made in the Arms Act, in respect of the victim of the aforesaid condition of his licence, howsoever, genuine his grievance may be.
HK,