Arms licence a right or privilege? Punjab and Haryana High Court draws line, denies permit to Delhi lawyer over criminal cases

“The legal position regarding the grant of arms licences is well settled, that the grant of such a licence is not a matter of right but is subject to the satisfaction of the licensing authority regarding the applicant’s antecedents, conduct, and the impact on public peace and safety,” the high court stated.

Background

• The petitioner, Brahma Prakash, an advocate practising in Delhi-NCR, originally applied for an arms licence in July 2014 for self-defence purposes.
• After an initial rejection and a subsequent successful appeal in 2017, his application was remanded for reconsideration.
• While the deputy commissioner of police, Ballabhgarh, initially provided a favourable recommendation in 2018, subsequent inquiries by police authorities in Varanasi, the petitioner’s former residence, revealed a pending criminal case involving charges under sections 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 427 (mischief causing damage to the amount of Rs 50) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
• The reports also noted a property dispute between the petitioner and his brother and recorded that preventive action had been taken against him under Section 151 (arrest to prevent commission of cognisable offences) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
• Based on these adverse reports, the commissioner of police, Faridabad, rejected the application in January 2020, citing concerns regarding the potential misuse of arms and disturbance to public peace.

‘No licence without police verification’

• The principal grievance of the petitioner is that the licensing authority as well as the appellate authority failed to consider the earlier favourable police recommendations and, instead, relied upon allegedly false and fabricated reports received from the police authorities at Varanasi.
• The power to grant or refuse an arms licence is regulated by the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959.
• Under Section 13 of the Act, the licensing authority is empowered to consider an application for the grant of a licence after making such inquiry as it deems necessary.
• Section 14 of the Act provides the circumstances under which the licensing authority shall refuse to grant a licence, including situations where the authority considers such refusal necessary for the security of the public peace or for public safety.
• The Ministry of Home Affairs’ (MHA) guidelines under Section 14 of the Arms Act expressly mandate that no arms licence can be issued without thorough police verification, including antecedents, assessment of threat perception, and the capability of the applicant to handle arms safely.
• The authorities acted in accordance with law and the relevant statute while considering the petitioner’s antecedents and threat perception before rejecting his application.

‘Varanasi police did not recommend’

• During the course of the verification conducted in 2018, a favourable recommendation dated 11.07.2018 was submitted by the deputy commissioner of police, Ballabhgarh, recommending the grant of licence.
• The record further shows that during the verification, it came to light that the petitioner had earlier resided in Varanasi and had relied upon the alleged murder of his father as one of the grounds for seeking the licence.
• The report submitted by the superintendent of police, Varanasi City, disclosed that a criminal case bearing under sections 323, 504, 506, and 427 of the Indian Penal Code was pending against the petitioner.
• It was also reported that preventive action had been taken against him under Section 151 of the CrPC.
• The report further indicated the existence of a property dispute between the petitioner and his brother and expressed reservations regarding the petitioner’s conduct. The Varanasi police authorities did not recommend the grant of the licence.
• The licensing authority again sought verification from the local police authorities at Faridabad.
• The subsequent reports submitted by the station house officer, the assistant commissioner, and the deputy commissioner of police did not recommend issuance of the arms licence to the petitioner.
• The reports indicated that in view of the disputes and criminal proceedings involving the petitioner, the possibility of misuse of arms or disturbance to public peace could not be ruled out.
• The power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution is limited to examining the decision-making process and not the merits of the decision itself.
• The court does not sit in appeal over the decision of the administrative authority.
• Allegations of malicious intent, without concrete proof, cannot form the basis for judicial intervention.