Allahabad High Court slams UP gun culture, asks details on arms licenses of Brij Bhushan Singh, other politicians
The Allahabad High Court noted that 10,08,953 arms licences have been granted as of date and said public display of weapons often disrupts social harmony and generates fear among ordinary people.
The Allahabad High Court noted that the DMs and the police heads across all 75 districts have failed to adhere to government orders and the Arms Act, 1959. (File Photo) Allahabad High Court news: The Allahabad High Court has said that a society in which armed persons assert dominance through visible force and threats does not become freer or more peaceful; rather, it erodes public trust, weakens the sense of safety, and disturbs civic peace.
Justice Vinod Diwakar was acting in a plea related to the use of guns in the state, when it noted that over 10 lakh arms licences had been granted as of date, but the state hadn’t disclosed information regarding politically influential persons, including Brij Bhushan Singh.
“A society in which armed individuals assert dominance through visible force and threats does not become freer or more peaceful; rather, it erodes public trust, weakens the sense of safety, and disturbs civic peace,” the court said on May 20.
Justice Vinod Diwakar said that the public display of weapons disrupts social harmony and generates fear and insecurity among ordinary people.
The court noted that the local police had previously failed to furnish details regarding certain influential individuals wielding substantial social and political influence.
To ensure fairness and non-discrimination, the court has specifically sought information for individuals wielding substantial social and political influence, including Raghuraj Pratap Singh, Dhananjay Singh, Sushil Singh, Brij Bhushan Singh, Vineet Singh, Ajay Marhad, Sujit Singh Belwa, Upendra Singh Guddu, Pappu Bhaukali, Indradev Singh, Sunil Yadav, Farar Azeem, Badshah Singh, Sangram Singh, Sullu Singh, Chulbul Singh, Sunny Singh, Chhunnu Singh, Uday Bhan Singh.
‘DMs, SPs of all 75 districts not adhering to government orders’
The order added that it is the prima facie view of this Court that the public display of weapons may create an illusion of dominance, strength, and protection, but it often disrupts social harmony and generates fear and insecurity among ordinary people.
The Joint Secretary (Home) has filed the affidavit on May 20, complying with the order of May 11 of the court regarding the information on firearms in the state.
Justice Diwakar remarked that the affidavit is self-explanatory and reveals that the district magistrates and also the Commissioners of Police/Senior Superintendents of Police of all 75 districts have not been adhering to the Government Orders issued from time to time.
It noted that the statutory provisions and rules are not being followed in their true letter and spirit by the concerned officers.
‘6,062 cases, licences granted to persons having a criminal history’
- The provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, and the Rules framed thereunder are also not being followed in their true letter and spirit by the concerned officers.
order dated March 23, this Court had specifically indicated the requirements to be complied with by the District Magistrates and the SSPs while dealing with applications for grant, renewal, and transfer of arms licences. - The earlier affidavit filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) discloses that, as of 10,08,953, arms licences have been granted.
- It further indicates that 23,407 applications under different categories are pending consideration; 1,738 appeals against orders passed by the District Magistrates are pending before the Commissioners; 20,960 families possess more than one arms licence; and in 6,062 cases, licences have been granted to persons having a criminal history involving two or more criminal cases.
- Order dated March 11, 2026, this court had granted one week’s time to the State Government to revisit its policy relating to grant and review of arms licences, particularly in respect of persons having criminal antecedents.
- The state was also directed to furnish district-wise, police station-wise, and name-wise details of arms licence holders against whom two or more criminal cases have been registered.
- It was further directed that the affidavit shall disclose particulars of pending criminal cases against such licence holders, along with details of their family members holding arms licences, if any.
- This court is of the considered view that equity is one of the foundational principles of the rule of law; therefore, in order to ensure good governance and maintain public confidence, the State must not only observe fairness and non-discrimination in policy, but such principles must also be reflected in day-to-day administration.
‘Gun culture not conducive to peaceful and rule-bound society’
- It shall be the collective as well as individual responsibility of all concerned officers to verify and furnish the correct addresses and complete particulars of the persons, in whose jurisdiction the persons mentioned below reside and operate.
- It is the prima facie view of this Court that the public display of weapons may create an illusion of dominance, strength, and protection, but it often disrupts social harmony and generates fear and insecurity among ordinary people.
- Although the open carrying of guns is sometimes justified in the name of self-defence, weapons that become instruments of intimidation promote fear rather than genuine security.
- True self-defence is intended to preserve life and maintain order, not to transform public spaces into environments of dominance and fear.
- For this reason, a culture that glorifies guns and intimidation cannot be regarded as conducive to a peaceful and rule-bound society.
Share
