Guns and poses

One of the last spheres in which the licence raj of yore continues to hold total sway, is the gun market. The Indian Arms Act confers vast and unaccounted powers on the licensing authorities. They are allowed to dispense these objects of desire 8212; which have come to be cultural markers of status in a way 8212; at their own discretion. The Sunday Express has just reported that 80 per cent of weapons recovered from terrorists and criminals in Punjab during the earlier Congress regime have found their way to those with the right connections, senior politicians, bureaucrats, police officers and the like, and at much lower prices than what they would cost in the market.

It is precisely such a nexus that allowed a young man called Manu Sharma the use of a licensed .22 bore pistol, which, as we all know, he used with such deadly effect. The murder of Jessica Lall and the subsequent trial raised crucial questions about the lack of transparency in the acquisition of firearms in India. How did Manu Sharma get his gun? What were the conditions he had to fulfil in order to lay his hands on it? The answers to questions such as these are elusive. The killing of Jessica Lall at point blank range raised much debate, but the dodgy ways in which firearms are acquired in the country did not figure in the discussion. The murder should have also changed the legal processes by which firearms are acquired in India. Unfortunately, that did not happen.

Certainly licensed guns have not wreaked the kind of damage that they have in the United States, but the figures of the National Crime Records Bureau for 2005 indicated that 16 per cent of homicide victims in India were felled by guns. So the country clearly cannot afford to be casual about its gun laws and procedures. Any serious reform should address the vast arbitrary powers that are vested in the gun licensing authorities and should also help make commercial transactions involving firearms more accountable and transparent.