Court Demands Transparency and Accountability in Arms License Processes to Curb Criminal Culture
In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has issued a directive emphasizing strict adherence to the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, and the Arms Rules, 2016. Justice Vinod Diwakar, presiding over the case of Jai Shankar Alias Bairistar v. State of U.P., highlighted the necessity for the District Magistrates and Police Commissioners to adhere strictly to statutory requirements in granting, renewing, and transferring arms licenses.
The court underscored the need for licensing authorities to issue a speaking order within 60 days of receiving a police report, as mandated by Rule 13 of the Arms Rules, 2016. Additionally, the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station is required to submit their report within 30 days, ensuring a transparent and efficient process.
The judgment comes in response to a concerning trend of arms licenses being granted to individuals with criminal histories, with over 6,000 such cases identified. The court criticized the lack of adherence to government orders and statutory provisions, which undermines social harmony and public confidence.
In an effort to combat the public display and misuse of firearms, the state has adopted a zero-tolerance policy, as reiterated by the court. This policy aims to dismantle the glorification of criminal culture and intimidation, which disrupts societal peace and safety.
Further, the court ordered the submission of detailed information regarding arms license holders with criminal antecedents, highlighting the importance of administrative accountability. Officers are instructed to provide accurate and complete data, with any concealment being treated as a serious dereliction of duty.
The court's directive serves as a reminder of the foundational principles of equity and non-discrimination that should guide public administration. By enforcing strict compliance, the court aims to restore public trust and ensure good governance.
The case will be revisited on May 26, 2026, to assess compliance with these directives, with the court warning of severe consequences for any lapses or intentional omissions by public officials.
Bottom line:-
Arms Act - District Magistrates and Commissioners of Police/Senior Superintendents of Police must strictly adhere to the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, and Arms Rules, 2016, while dealing with applications for grant, renewal, and transfer of arms licenses to ensure compliance with equity and good governance principles.
Statutory provision(s): Arms Act, 1959, Arms Rules, 2016, Rule 13, Rule 14.
Jai Shankar Alias Bairistar v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2904795
