ARMS AND AMMUNITION LAWS IN INDIA

History and Evolution of Arms Act in India

Indian Arms Act 1878

In India, the arms act has a long and illustrious history. In India, this act changes with the
passage of time and the changing circumstances.
It all began in colonial times when massive armed crowds of Indians assembled to challenge
British rule following the insurrection of 1857.
Indians worried Britishers, who saw them as a threat to their dominance in this country. So, in
1878, Britishers enacted the Indian Arms Act, 1878, to put an end to the threat of a popular
rebellion.
No Indian could keep arms without prior authorization or a legitimate license, according to
the Indian arms act. During the reign of triumph herd actions, this rule was enacted.
This act was waived for all Europeans. Indians who owned any form of weapon, on the other
hand, faced severe penalties and restrictions.
This act is highly opposed by Mahatma Gandhi and other national leaders. "Among the
numerous atrocities of British administration in India, the Act depriving an entire nation of
weaponry would be remembered as the blackest," he remarked.
The Indian guns act of 1878 continued to restrict Indians' access to firearms until the end of
the colonial period.
The Arms Act of 1962, which took effect on October 1, 1962, replaced the Indian Arms Act
of 1878.
It has been determined that allowing powerful citizens to own and use firearms in specific
situations is important. As a result, the act went into force.
As a result, the right to keep and bear arms was not declared a fundamental right, but it was
recognized as a legal right by The Arms Act of 1959. The Arms Rule of 1962 went into effect
as well.
Arms act, 1959

According to the Arms Act of 1959, a licence for the ownership of arms can be awarded to
any Indian citizen who has good grounds, such as a threat to his or her life or self-defence.

According to Article 14, authorities might refuse to provide a licence for "public peace or
public safety" concerns.

Authorities are not required to provide justifications for their reluctance to provide such
licences. Only half of the applications for permits are accepted by the authorities.

Every three years, the citizen who possesses an arms licence needs to renew it.

Every year, approximately 3.22 per 100,000 persons are slain in India, with 90 per cent of
those who perpetrate the crime using illicit firearms.

Arms (Amendment) Act 2019

The Arms Amendment Bill was approved by parliament to tighten the 1959 Arms Act. This
measure achieves the goal of imposing the harshest penalty possible, such as life
imprisonment, for the possession and manufacture of illicit weapons.

On December 10, the Rajya Sabha revised the act, and the Lok Sabha amended it on
December 9, 2019.

This measure seeks to impose harsher penalties on those in possession of illicit weapons and
those who engage in impulsive and careless firing, risking the lives and safety of others. The
bill assumes that the crime is more serious in the eyes of the law and that it is punishable by
imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of up to Rs. one lakh or both.

The measure also stipulates a maximum penalty of life imprisonment if convicted of creating
illicit arms.

A licence was necessary to own or carry a firearm under the Arms Act of 1959. An individual
might also get a licence for up to three firearms under the statute.

The Arms Amendment Bill 2019 cuts the maximum number of firearms per person from
three to one.
Objectives of Arms Act, 1959

The preamble of this act declares, "An Act to consolidate and revise the law relating to arms
and ammunition."

Reduce the manufacture and sale of illegal firearms to reduce gun-related crimes.

Dangerous weapons are not available to citizens to safeguard society's peace and order.
Citizens can get self-defence weapons with the help of authorised licences.
To own firearms and ammunition, a licence should be necessary.

Procedure to obtain a gun license

Section 13 of the Arms Act, 1959, defines the method for obtaining a firearms licence in
India.An applicant must submit a completed Form A-1 application to the licencing body,
together with any applicable fees.

Document required for application

1. Passport size photos

2. Address proof

3. Date of birth proof

4. Identification proof

5. Medical certificate

6. Any other document required by the authority

Conditions in which firearm license gets issued

Citizens of India can obtain non-prohibited bore gun licences under the Arms Act of 1959. It
can be given to someone who meets the following criteria:-

● A person may be wealthy, or under threat, so he/she may apply for a license for

self-defence.

● Gunmen and bodyguard squads for politicians and VVIPs were also authorised for
general security for banks and organisations.
● Agricultural growers can also seek a guns licence to safeguard their crops from wild
boars.
● Firearm licences can also be obtained for sporting activities such as shooting.
● NRIs who have held a firearm licence in another country for more than two years can
apply for the same in India to bring their handgun back.
● Foreign people may be allowed to stay in India for a maximum of six months in a
six-month period if they have proper grounds.

Prohibited arms and ammunition in India

Section 2(i) of the Arms Act of 1959 defines "prohibited arms." These are weaponry, such as
artillery, anti-aircraft, and anti-tank weapons, that are designed to discharge unpleasant
liquids, gases, or other substances. Knives, spears, bows and arrows, and other similar
weapons are supposed to be excluded from the definition.

Bombs, grenades, rockets, missiles, and other forbidden ammunition are defined in Section
2(h) of the aforesaid statute.
Punishments for Offences Under Section 25

Section 25 of the Arms Act of 1959 establishes the penalties for all of the Act's offences.

If a maker sells, transfers, converts, tests, repairs, shortens the barrel, or transports arms and
ammunition in and outside of India, he or she will be sentenced to life in jail, or to a
minimum of seven years in prison, or to a fine under sections 5 and 11 of The Arms Act,
1959.

Whoever has illegal arms and ammunition in their hands breaches section 11 of the act and is
sentenced to a minimum of seven years in jail, with the possibility of being extended to
fourteen years, as well as a fine.

According to the foregoing rule, anyone who takes a firearm from a police officer or armed
force by force will be sentenced to at least 10 years in jail, with the possibility of life
imprisonment, as well as a fine.

Anyone who violates section 7 of the aforesaid legislation by selling, manufacturing,

transferring, or repairing unlawful arms and ammunition faces a life sentence or a minimum
of ten years in jail, as well as a fine.

If a person who is a maker or a dealer of arms and ammunition violates section 44 of the
aforesaid act by failing to keep a record or making false entries, he or she will be imprisoned
for not less than two years and up to five years, or fined.

COMPARING USA AND INDIA ARMS LAWS

Comparing Indian and American rights is helpful today because of their dissimilar histories
in the twentieth century, rather than their common foundations in the seventeenth century.
The right to bear guns for self-defense has been effectively prohibited and given under some
sircumtances in india. The Blackstonian assumptions that underpin it have been abandoned,
and the privilege of possessing firearms has become increasingly restricted. However, in the
United States, the Second Amendment is still in the Constitution, gun ownership is
ubiquitous and subject to far less control than in England, and the old Blackstonian views are
fiercely promoted by a large and frequently outspoken segment of the public.

Americans, unlike the India, have a written Constitution that guarantees the right of citizens
to keep and bear arms. And, unlike the Indians, Americans retain their firearms. However,
there is scant evidence that the Second Amendment has played a substantial role in
safeguarding the right to bear arms in the United States. That could alter in the future, but
historical information concerning the right's beginnings in history is unlikely to help.
Consider the key features of the arguments that have emerged concerning the right reading of
the Second Amendment to see why, and to set the stage for an analysis that might have some
practical application.

The literature on this topic has been devoured to an astonishing degree by a single, limiting
question: whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms
or just a collective right of state governments to maintain military organisations like our
present National Guards. Arguments can be divided into two categories when there has been
no definitive judicial resolution of a constitutional question, as is usually the case when there
has been no definitive judicial resolution of a constitutional question: arguments directly from
the Constitution's text and arguments based on historical evidence about how that text was
understood by those who framed and adopted it.The evidence in both areas largely supports
the "individual right" reading of the Second Amendment. This isn't a difficult or close
question.
Indeed, even without any supporting historical data, the textual argument is nearly convincing
on its own. Unfortunately, the widespread adoption of the states' right idea necessitates a
thorough examination of the arguments in order to move on to the more challenging concerns
that remain.

Case Study Involving Arms Act

State of Madhya Pradesh V. Ayub Khan on 29 August 2012

The Supreme Court of India has issued a brief on the Arms Act, 1959, which reads as
follows:

Without a licence, the accused was discovered with a country-made barrel gun, two rounds of
ammunition, and 50 grammes of dynamite. He was charged under the arms act of 1959,
section 25(1)(a).

The magistrate ruled that the accused was a first-time offender, but he was still in possession
of illegal weapons and ammunition, as well as having spent so much time in detention.

Rather than receiving the death penalty, accused Ayub Khan was sentenced to one year of
solitary confinement and a fine of Rs. 100.
The defendants file a criminal revision appeal with the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya
Pradesh.

Madhya Pradesh filed a petition with the Supreme Court of India. According to the Supreme
Court, the lower court made a serious error by not imposing the statutory minimum
punishment.

The accused was charged under section 25(1)(a) of the arms statute, which stipulates a
minimum sentence of three years in prison.
Finally, the Hon'ble Supreme Court ordered that the accused serve three years in prison and
pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, plus another three months in prison if the fine is not paid.

Conclusion

The Arms Act has undergone numerous amendments since 1959, with the most recent update
occurring in 2010.

There was also a debate about whether an airgun should be included in this statute, but the
Supreme Court of India dismissed it.

Arms and ammunition were frequently blamed for posing a threat to residents. It always
disrupts society's peace and order, and it can sometimes lead to bloodshed.

The law is required to govern and prevent persons from engaging in behaviours that endanger
the lives of others as well as their own.
Despite such tight restrictions, more than six crore illicit firearms are present in India,
according to a small arms survey, which has become a reason to promote more crimes such as
murder, robbery, extortion, abduction, and others. As previously stated, illicit guns are used in
90% of homicides.

The Arms Act's major goal is to reduce crime caused by illegal weapons trafficking and to
control arms and ammunition offences.