sa_ali wrote:
Yea the other advantage is that notification that NRAI member are not suppose to deposit weapon at the time of the election. But even this i didnt get it, what is there to do with the membership of NRAI to be exempted of this, it should be available to all. I never got the logic behind it.
Yes I fully appreciate and understand your question. I would like to quote the following to illustrate:
“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.” —Thomas Jefferson
Our Arms Act 1959 perfectly fits this quote and perfectly confuses the executive to make anything mean everything or nothing, unless and until clause 40 under CHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS of Arms Act 1959 is read and understood carefully.
You may also refer the ongoing post by me at
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 6&start=23 and
http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india ... r_5_6.html for:
CHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS
40. Protection of action taken in good faith
No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act.
41. Power to exempt
Where the Central Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest so to do, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such conditions, if any, as it may specify in the notification,---
(a) exempt any person or class of persons, or exclude any description of arms or ammunition, or withdraw any part of India, from the operation of all or any of the provisions of this Act; and
(b) as often as may be, cancel any such notification and again subjects, by a like notification, the person or class of persons or the description of arms and ammunition or the part of India to the operation of such provisions.
Question: Is this an Act of law/article of good faith by the legislature being not understood by the confused executive by citing public interest hence directly/indirectly violating/abridging the fundamental rights of law abiding by making their fundamental rights a plaything by using this law/article of faith? Or that the legislature had overstepped their constitutional authority and this act is suffering from "Vice of over delegation"?
Answer: No matter what the perceived intentions of the legislature appear to any individual for enacting of the Arms Act 1959, it boils down to just an article of good faith. It becomes very clear from reading the clause 40 under CHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS of Arms Act 1959 that the intentions of the legislature where very laudable and clear, reposing completely in the good faith of it's citizens. There is no need to go into the intended or implicit meanings or the context of the sentence or the words in it of the sentence "No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act" of clause 40 under CHAPTER VI - MISCELLANEOUS of Arms Act 1959. It is written in simple sentence in plain English constructed from commonly used and understood words. It follows from mere reading of this clause that "good faith" is the very basis for "anything" under this Arms Act 1959, therefore if by any mean/s, skill/s, document/s a person is able to establish a "good faith" with the licensing authority he can get any license under Arms Act. If "good faith" is the very basis for "anything" under this Arms Act 1959, then there should not be any trouble for Licensing Authority to issue any license under Arms Act 1959 instantly to every applicant in "good faith", if the applicant submits an affidavit clearly establishing "good faith" by means of affidavit like the reason for application(self protection, etc.), his identity and address. Question also arises if "good faith" is the very basis of this arms act, then even the requirement of a license for anything under Arms Act 1959 is unnecessary unless each and every citizen is a suspect. It also follows that since the very basis of this act is based on "good faith", there should not be any problem to implement or contest any of laws/by-laws/Rules/Notifications issued for the purpose of implementing Arms Act 1959 if a person is able to establish "good faith". It also follows since this Arms Act 1959 is essentially nothing but completely rests on good faith, the need for amendments to the law itself and subsequent by-laws/Rules/Notifications becomes unnecessary beyond the point of establishing good faith. Unless and until the government of the people, by the people, for the people becomes so insensitive that it starts having faith or starts loosing faith in its own people on the basis of merely if they just belong to a set of "class of persons" and starts implementing the clause 41. Power to exempt.
