Allahabad HC: Licensing Authority under the Arms Act shall cancel arms license of any person carrying arms in Court Premises
In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court issued a slew of directions addressing the serious issue of lawyers and litigants carrying arms inside court premises.
The directions were issued by a single judge bench of J. Pankaj Bhatia while hearing a Writ Petition against the order of the Licensing Authority, which had cancelled the arms license of the Petitioner, an advocate, for carrying arms in court premises.
Carrying Arms is not a Fundamental Right
The bench, relying upon the Full Bench decision of Kailash Nath and Ors. versus State of U.P. & Ors AIR 1985 ALL 291 held that arms license is merely a privilege granted by the State and is not a Right and right to carry arms is not a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Law as a profession does not require guns
The bench also rejected the argument of the petitioner that law profession is typical and challenging, which requires the carrying of fire arms. Condemning the argument raised by the Petitioner, the bench lamented the lack of systematic training provided through chamber affiliations and held,
“It is a common knowledge that ever since historical times never has a lawyer relied upon anything other than his sharp knowledge of law, hard work and the power that flows from his pen to make mark in the legal profession. The young professionals entering the Bar like the petitioner herein, needs serious counseling to get over such mistaken notion that he carries while entering the legal profession. This also highlights that the legal profession is being crowded by persons who are not undergoing any systematic training, which was earlier provided informally through chamber affiliations; this aspect is within the domain of Bar Council and the Bar Council is advised to redress this aspect through effective ways and means after discussion”.
Interpretation of Section 17(3) of the Arms Act
Relying upon the decision of Sardar Govindrao v. State of M.P., 1964 SCC OnLine SC 93, Official Liquidator v. Dharti Dhan (P) Ltd. (1977) 2 SCC 166, N.D. Jayal v. Union of India [(2004) 9 SCC 362] and D.K. Basu v. State of W.B., (2015) 8 SCC 744, the bench interpreted that the word ‘may’ in Section 17(3)(b) is a power coupled with duty, which implies that once the existence of the conditions laid down in Section 17(3)(b) are shown to exist, the licensing authority has to necessarily suspend or revoke the arms license.
‘Public Safety’
The Bench noted that Rule 614-A of The General Rules (Civil) as well as Rule 32 of the Rules, 2016, prohibit the carrying of arms in the Court premises. Holding that access to justice is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution, the bench held permitting the lawyers or any litigant other than the member of the armed forces on duty to carry arms would be clearly a threat to public peace or public safety in the Court premises, which not only has an adverse affect on the litigants frequenting the District Courts but also has the affect of adversely affecting the credibility of the administration of justice.
Directions
Noticing that the directions issued by the Allahabad HC in PIL No.2436 of 2019 are not being followed in letter and spirit, the bench issued the following directions:
All the District Judges and all the Judicial Officers working in the entire State of Uttar Pradesh shall take steps for registration of the cases under The Arms Act against any person whether it is a litigant or a lawyer carrying arms within the Court premises and shall forward a request to the District Magistrate/Licensing Authority of the concerned area for taking immediate steps for cancellation of the arms license.
The District Judges and the Judicial Officers as well as the Security In-Charge of the District Courts are bound to take steps for registration of FIRs/complaints against the person carrying arms within the Court premises as defined under Explanation II to Rule 614-A of The General Rules (Civil) and to forward such report to the Licensing Authority for taking immediate steps for cancellation of the arms license.
The Licensing Authority under the Arms Act shall stake steps for cancellation of the arms license in respect of a person found or alleged to be carrying arms.
Any person found carrying ‘Arms’ in the entire Court premises including common areas, Court rooms, lawyers’ chambers, Bar Associations, Canteens and other public areas within the entire Court premises would be deemed to be constituting breach of ‘public peace’ or ‘public safety’ for the purpose of exercise of powers under Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act.
You can read the judgment here: WRIT - C No. - 2461 of 2023
