So all our effort has been in vain.
No they have not been in vain. It clearly proves that MHA does not listen to valid concerns of the citizens. Does someone have obtained a copy/s obtained by RTI of
http://www.mha.nic.in/pdfs/DAAM-PolicyI ... 211209.pdf and of the reply/s sent objecting the same?
A very important question to all: Are we willing join in this PIL filed in 2007 by advocate Arvind Kumar Sharma as stake holders and counter the MHA? We can also contact the respondents in this PIL and their lawyers.
I am of the opinion that these issues are just the symptoms of the real problem that is the Arms Act 1959 and the rules and notifications issued therein. The net result has been gradual slide downwards resulting in violation of the fundamental Rights of Life/liberty/equality/Freedom of movement. We have to come out the the thinking that criminals can be prevented by any law from acquiring firearms. This is the crux of the problem. Arms Act or no Arms Act, criminals will manage to get arms. It makes no difference to the victim of crime if he/she is assaulted by legal or illegal firearms. Under no circumstances victim's fundamental rights need to be violated by government under one excuse or the other.
Subjecting the grant of license solely on police verification has following practical problems:
a) It is a fact that police in India is still working under the colonial administrative setup, hence it is just a tool in the hands of ruling party. If party X is in power, then it's supporters will not have problem in getting police report done. But the supporters of opposition party will get their licenses suspended pending subject to police enquiry which will never complete.
b) Reach and level of corruption in police is also well known, hence the scope of demanding/providing illegal gratification increases exponentially. Those who will grease the palms will get police report others will count their days waiting for police report. We are all aware of the experience of "police verification" of passports.
Please read the intentions of legislature in Aims and Objectives of Arms Act 1959(ref:
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2779)
" (b)(ii) that weapons of self-defence are available for all citizens under license unless their antecedents or propensities do not entitle them for the privilige;and
(iii)that firearms required for training purposes and ordinary civilians are made more easily available on permits;...."
Then read section 40 of Arms Act under Chapter VI Miscellaneous:
Protection of action taken in good faith.
40. Protection of action taken in good faith.- No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for any thing which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act.
It is clear from section 40 that Arms Act 1959 after reading in conjunction with above mentioned aims and objectives of Arms Act, that it hinges on nothing but good faith of people. Then what is this above section for? Is it to protect "any person" in the country who keeps arms with purpose of self defense or the executive who "inadvertently" issues license to alleged criminals in "good faith" after "No Police verification" or "Police Verification"?
You may also read my opinions at
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 6&start=17
My another view of the Arms Act is that it is suffering from "vice of over delegation". How will police be able to verify the antecedents/propensities of applicants when it is not able to verify the same for it's own police officers:
a) Please read
http://www.mha.nic.in/pdfs/DAAM-PolicyI ... 211209.pdf the page 8 of 14, MHA wants special provision to grant of licenses to police personal. It means either fellow police officers are not able to verify the antecedents/propensities of fellow police officers or the Licensing Authorities are not able to understand how to implement Arms Act and related myriad of rules and notifications. If the entire system is "free and fair" the police officers should not have any problem to get arms license by the normal and due course for the grant of Arms License. Or does it mean that the Arms Act 1959 and/or related rules and notifications are suffering from the "vice of over delegation" and the executive is not able to implement it to the extent that even the police officers are having difficulty obtaining Arms Licenses, resulting in their fundamental rights getting violated?
b) 41. Power to exempt.
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) 2*[exempt any person or class of persons (either generally or in relation to such description of arms
and ammunition as may be specified in the notification)], 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 subject, 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.
In my opinion these unbridled powers to exempt/exclude or cancel for "any person or class of persons" "as often as may be" given to the executive in the name of "public interest" to violate various fundamental rights are nothing but "vice of over delegation". It has reduced the fundamental rights of people into nothing but a "plaything" in the hands of executive. Just because one belongs to a certain "class" the fundamental rights will be violated even though he/she has committed no crime.
