Site icon Legal Vidhiya

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ARMS ACT, 1959

Admin
Advertisements
Spread the love

This article is written by Nivetha S of 10th Semester of Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, an intern under Legal Vidhiya.

ABSTRACT

A significant piece of legislation that governs the use, ownership, and transfer of weapons and ammunition in India is the Arms Act of 1959. It divides firearms into various classes according to their intended use and level of fatality. The Act specifies eligibility requirements and the steps involved in obtaining licenses or permits for the lawful possession and acquisition of firearms. It includes rules for the production, distribution, import, export, and transportation of firearms, guaranteeing adherence to safety requirements, and discouraging illicit activities involving firearms. The Act also lists ammunition and firearms that are prohibited, including semi-automatic and automatic weapons, unless special permission is obtained in extreme cases. Authority to monitor and enforce adherence to the Act’s provisions is bestowed upon authorities, who may also choose to revoke or suspend licenses if terms and conditions are broken. The goal of the penalties set forth for different offenses is to discourage the unlawful acquisition, transfer, or use of firearms by unauthorized individuals.

KEYWORDS

Firearms, Licensing, Ammunition, Possession, Penalties, Offenses, Amendments, Public Safety, Enforcement, Prohibited bore arms, non-prohibited bore arms.

INTRODUCTION

To reduce the use of illegal weapons and the violence they cause, the Indian Parliament passed the Arms Act, 1959, which consolidated and amended existing laws pertaining to weapons and ammunition. It took the place of the 1878 Indian Arms Act.[1]The Indian Parliament passed the Arms Act, 1959, specifically to amend and combine the various laws pertaining to weapons and ammunition. There was an urgent need to stop the threat posed by people in possession of illegal weapons who might use them to commit crimes and inflict violence on society. In a civil society, the government and the state are answerable to the people; as such, they must effectively manage the nation, contribute to its advancement, and provide its members with the necessities of life. Law and order must be upheld, crimes must be avoided, and citizens must be shielded from both external and internal aggression. The state uses its armed forces, like the army, and law enforcement organizations, like the police, to defend its citizens. The state has given these defense forces and agencies permission to use lethal force and weapons as needed to defend the state and further its objectives. During their various operations, they employ such force and utilize weapons to stay one step ahead of the enemy tactically, offensively, and strategically. Chapter II of the Act explicitly states that the Act’s goal is to be as comprehensive as possible to cover every aspect of the manufacturing, import, export, possession, transport, and import of arms and ammunition. Additionally, Chapter IV of the Act describes the procedures and powers that the government and other authorities may use to control the use and possession of firearms and ammunition in India. These include provisions for detention orders, search warrants, arrests, and seizures.

HISTORY OF THE ARMS ACT

Indians using guns to frighten the British, who were in charge at the time, began with the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857. During this unsettling event during colonial times, the British gave the Indian sepoys the infamous Enfield rifle. But the sepoys had to bite off the greased cartridges made of cow and pig fat to use the rifle. This tactic, which was employed to ridicule the religious beliefs of Muslims and Hindus, caused a great deal of violence and discontent among the Indian populace. The sepoys thus had more motivation to organize and begin a bloody uprising against British authorities.[2]

After realizing how quickly the Indians could put aside their differences and band together to fight against their mistreatment, the English concluded that the best way to prevent any more widespread uprisings against them would be to set up a demonstration that would prevent the Indians from owning any weapons. This led to the creation of the Indian Arms Act of 1878. According to this Act, arms could only be owned by Native Americans, provided they obtained the necessary authorization. Further regulations were placed on the production, distribution, ownership, and transportation of firearms under Lord Lytton’s administration as Viceroy of India. The Act’s hypocrisy was exposed by the ease with which Europeans were spared its provisions, while Indians faced harsh punishments for owning any kind of weapon. Following independence, the Indian government passed the Indian Arms Act of 1959, which stipulated that law-abiding citizens were required to possess and use firearms for self-defense, sports, and crop protection. This Act was followed by the 1962 Arms Rules. The objectives and reach of the 1959 Arms Act The preamble states that the Act’s objective is to “consolidate and amend the law relating to arms and ammunition.” This Act’s main goal is to control and restrict the unlawful transfer of firearms and ammunition. It forbids the use of dangerous weapons by civilians and specifies the process for obtaining licenses for specific types of ammunition or weapons. The entirety of India is covered by this Act. Furthermore, this Act recognizes the right of the people to keep and bear arms as a legitimate one. It was determined that in some situations, like self-defense or when there is a significant threat to life or property, allowing them access to specific weapons and ammunition is essential.[3]

DEFINITIONS UNDER ARMS ACT

PROVISIONS FOR LICENSE

The Act’s Chapter II and Chapter III contain the license-related provisions. Any person who wants to own a firearm or ammunition must have a license, according to Section 3 of the Act. It does, however, provide an exception whereby someone who does not themselves possess a license may carry any firearm or ammunition in the presence of the license holder, or with the holder’s written consent, for the purpose of license repair or renewal.

 TYPES OF ARMS

Section 2 of the Act permits two primary categories of firearms to be owned by an individual:

The main factor used to differentiate between the two is the bore measurements, which represent the thickness or diameter of the bullet. The 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks led to changes in the laws governing gun ownership. Prior to the attack, family heirlooms and members of the armed forces were allowed to use weapons that were prohibited by law. After the attacks, however, only people who either live in areas where terrorist attacks are likely to occur, who are potential targets of terrorists because of their line of work, or who otherwise pose a “serious and imminent threat” to themselves, or members of their family are permitted to own PB firearms. The only organization with the authority to grant PB licenses is the Central Government.[6]

PUNISHMENTS

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the infraction, the Arms Act imposes harsh penalties for violations.

CONDITIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A FIREARM LICENSE

Indian citizens may obtain licenses for non-prohibited bore guns under the 1959 Arms Act. Anyone who can affirm the following status is eligible to receive it:

IN INDIA, WHO IS ALLOWED TO BEAR ARMS?

While NPB firearms are available for public ownership, PB firearms are typically only used and owned by law enforcement, the military, and other security personnel. But in certain cases, if someone can demonstrate that they pose a threat to their life and the police are unable to protect them, they might also be given a license to possess PB firearms. Notably, state governments issue licenses for NPB firearms, whereas the federal government grants licenses for PB firearms.

RECOGNIZING SWORDS, BLADES, AND KNIVES UNDER THE ARMS ACT

Weapons, including swords, daggers, bayonets, knives, and any other pointed or sharp weapon, are covered by the Arms Act. The length of a knife’s blade, however, is not explicitly specified by law for it to be considered a sword. Though there are some differences in opinion, law enforcement and the courts have the final say on whether a blade longer than nine inches qualifies as a sword. Under the Arms Act, carrying such weapons without a license could result in consequences.

KIRPAN CARRYING PROHIBITION FOR SIKHS

The Sikh community is granted an exemption from Indian law when it comes to carrying “kirpans.” Sikhs are permitted to carry a “kirpan” for religious reasons, and it is not regarded as a weapon under the Arms Act, 1959, and the Arms Rules, 2016. “Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the possession and carrying of kirpans by Sikhs,” the Act expressly declares. As a result, a Sikh is not required to obtain a license to carry a kirpan, acknowledging its significance to their religious beliefs.[8]

PEPPER SPRAY

A license or other paperwork is not needed to purchase pepper spray, making it legal. Manufacturers must, however, obtain a government license. The regulations surrounding the possession of pepper spray on public transportation are ambiguous, particularly in metro trains, where the Central Industrial Security Force retains discretion over its approval. This is because there is a possibility that individuals may carry poison gas concealed in pepper spray cans.

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE ACT

POWERS OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

The Central Government may do the following by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette:

NON-APPLICATION OF THE ARMS ACT, 1959 IN CERTAIN CASES

The following situations would result in this Act’s provisions not being applicable:

PRESENT SCENARIO OF GUN LEGISLATION

Since its enactment by the Parliament in 1959, the Arms Act, 1959, has been the primary legal document pertaining to arms control in independent India. The primary laws governing the sale, manufacture, possession, acquisition, license, import, export, and transportation of firearms and ammunition in India are the Arms Act and the Arms Rules, 1962. The Arms Act of 1878 served as the model for the current Act, which was introduced with notable modifications to accommodate India’s requirements after gaining independence. To make the Arms Act of 1959 relevant in the modern social context, it was amended in 1971, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1995, 2010, and most recently in 2016.

Gun possession and ownership are not protected by the constitution or the law in India. The Arms Act of 1959 makes no mention of the right that the Act grants to possess and own a gun. The Arms Act is a restrictive law governing gun control rather than a facilitative statute promoting gun rights. As a result, the court makes it abundantly evident in its interpretation of the gun laws and policies that possessing a gun is a privilege rather than a right. Without current permits and licenses from the relevant government bodies, no one is allowed to manufacture, transport, sell, own, possess, use, or engage in the business of manufacturing or dealing in guns, firearms, and ammunition. Considering the global increase in terrorist acts, criminal activity, gun violence, and mass shootings, the Indian government has recently tightened its regulations regarding gun ownership and possession. India is thought to have the world’s strictest gun control laws and regulations. The government has enacted new laws that are more stringent than the ones that existed before. Under these new regulations, those who wish to obtain a gun must demonstrate that they meet the necessary requirements, submit to a stringent background investigation, and complete an arms related safety training program that covers safe handling, proper firing technique, and how to store and transport firearms.[11]

CASE LAWS

Ganesh Chandra Bhatt v. District Magistrate

A writ petition asking for mandamus, directing the respondents to take into consideration the petitioner’s application for a license to possess a revolver under the Arms Act of 1959, was filed. The court granted the writ petition and ordered the respondents to grant the petitioner a license to possess firearms. The court further decided that an application for a license to possess a non-prohibited weapon must be resolved within three months, or it will be assumed to have been approved.

Kailash Nath v. State of U.P

A five-judge bench of the court ruled that granting an arms license is a privilege rather than a right. The court noted that while every citizen has the right to apply for an arms license for the purpose of defending themselves and their property, the state bears the primary responsibility for these tasks. The court also noted that Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty, does not apply to the right to bear arms. The Act also includes provisions for license renewal and for license variation, suspension, and revocation by the relevant authority.

 State of U.P. v. Jaswant Singh Sarna

The respondent was a licensed arms dealer. The respondent applied for a renewal of the license after it expired. According to Sections 14(1)(b)(i)(3) and 15(3) of the Arms Act, 1959, the state government declined the renewal, citing the respondent’s unfitness to hold the licenses. Respondent filed a petition against the order, which was granted by the court, which also ordered the state government to reevaluate Respondent’s application for renewal. The state government filed an appeal against the court’s decision, but it was denied. In this instance, the court also noted that the Arms Act of 1859 is a progressive piece of legislation that emphasizes popular liberal viewpoints that were conspicuously lacking in the Arms Act of 1878.[12]

 Gaya Din v. State

The applicant, who had been found guilty of possessing a pistol and ammunition under Section 19(f) of the Arms Act and sentenced to 18 months of hard labor, filed a revision petition. In his not-guilty plea, the applicant refuted the claims that the handgun and ammunition were found on him. The prosecution provided substantial proof of the previously mentioned recovery. Based on the evidence at hand, the trial court found the applicant guilty in accordance with Section 19(f) of the Arms Act and imposed the aforementioned sentence. He filed this revision in the High Court after his appeal before the Sessions Court was denied. The applicant’s conviction and sentence were upheld by the High Court, which rejected the revision.

Guljarsing v. State of Maharashtra,

The applicants were found guilty of possessing a revolver as a weapon and ammunition in accordance with Section 3 read in conjunction with Section 25(a) of the Arms Act, 1959. The prosecution contended that the evidence seized from the applicants fit both the definition of “arms” in Section 2(1)(c) of the Act and the definition of the term “ammunition” under Section 2(1)(b) of the Act. The accused, however, refuted these accusations and stated that the items found weren’t real weapons or ammunition. After hearing from both sides and reviewing the available evidence, the court concluded that the prosecution’s arguments were unpersuasive because there is no evidence to support the claim that the items that were seized are “arms.” Even though something might appear to be a “firearm,” it might turn out to be a showpiece or a pointless device when put to the test. The court cleared the accused applicants as a result.[13]

Sanjay Dutt v. State through C.B.I.

It was discovered that the accused possessed an AK-56 rifle, which is forbidden by the 1959 Arms Act. Sections 3(3), 5 and 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, as well as Sections 3 and 7 read in conjunction with Sections 25(1A) and (1B) of the Arms Act, 1959, were the charges brought against him upon his arrest. Due to a lack of evidence connecting the accused to terrorist activity, the TADA court cleared him under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act; however, the Arms Act found him guilty of unlawfully possessing a weapon. After being found guilty, he received a six-year prison sentence. The Supreme Court heard the case after a special leave petition was filed, upholding the TADA court’s ruling but reducing the man’s sentence to five years of hard labor for unlawfully possessing weapons and ammunition.

Mahendra Singh v. State of West Bengal

In the appellant’s possession, a gun without a license or permit and a bag containing live cartridges were found. Under Sections 25(1A) and 27 of the Act, the appellant was prosecuted, found guilty, and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment. His High Court appeal was summarily dismissed, but the Court granted him special permission to appeal. The Court decided that it was not possible to conclude that the appellant did not know or intend for the firearms to be in his possession based on the evidence that was on file. As a result, Section 25(1A) justified his conviction. Nevertheless, his conviction under this section is unsupportable because there is no evidence to back up the conviction for the offense under Section 27.

CONCLUSION

Although the right to self-defense is inalienable, India has strict laws governing the ownership and use of firearms to protect the public and uphold the rule of law. Every citizen must be aware of their rights and obligations under the Arms Act of 1959 and adhere to the established legal procedure to obtain a firearms license. In addition to putting lives in danger, unlawful gun ownership and use can have serious legal repercussions. Hence, the Arms Act of 1959 provides a crucial legal framework for striking a balance between personal freedoms and public safety. The purpose of the Arms Act of 1959 is to uphold social order and prohibit the improper use of firearms. Any weapon, whether it be a knife, sword, or gun, has the potential to be harmful if handled improperly. As a result, those who violate this Act’s provisions face severe consequences under the law. Furthermore, as evidenced by the law’s respect for religious beliefs, Sikhs are not allowed to own “kirpans.” For their own safety as well as the safety of the society in which they live, it is imperative that every citizen be aware of these laws and make sure they abide by them.

REFERENCES

  1. Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 16, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa
  2. Legal service India, A Brief of Arms Act, 1959 (Nov 16, 2023.) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-9690-a-brief-of-arms-act-1959.html
  3. I pleaders, Arms Act, 1959. (Nov 17, 2023.)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/possession-of-arms-under-the-arms-act

[1] Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 16, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa

[2] Legal service India, A Brief of Arms Act, 1959 (Nov 16, 2023.) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-9690-a-brief-of-arms-act-1959.html

[3] Legal service India, A Brief of Arms Act, 1959 (Nov 16, 2023.) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-9690-a-brief-of-arms-act-1959.html

[4] I pleaders, Arms Act, 1959. (Nov 17, 2023.)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/possession-of-arms-under-the-arms-act

[5] I pleaders, Arms Act, 1959. (Nov 17, 2023.)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/possession-of-arms-under-the-arms-act

[6] Legal service India, A Brief of Arms Act, 1959 (Nov 17, 2023.) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-9690-a-brief-of-arms-act-1959.html

[7] Legal service India, The Arms Act in India (Nov 17, 2023.) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-11239-the-arms-act-in-india.html

[8] Century law firm, Arms Act, 1959 in India (Nov 18, 2023.)

https://www.centurylawfirm.in/blog/arms-act-1959-in-india-legality-licensing-provisions-arms-rules-2016/

[9] I pleaders, Arms Act, 1959. (Nov 18, 2023.)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/possession-of-arms-under-the-arms-act

[10] Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 18, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa

[11] Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 18, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa

[12] Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 18, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa

[13] Aequitas Victoria, The Arms Act,1959 (Nov 18, 2023.) https://www.aequivic.in/post/aijacla-the-arms-act-1959-a-legal-analysis-and-comparative-study-with-usa

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.

PDF 📄
Exit mobile version