If licensing authorities are merely implementing authorities, then who is the authority who issues license.
It is the Constitution of India. It is the Constitution of India that is guaranteeing arms as fundamental right to all its citizens under Article 19. Use of the word "grant" in Arms Act 1959 is misnomer, the correct word is issue. The licensing authorities are merely issuing a copy of license that is vested/implied with the citizens of India because of the Constitution. Read Allahabad High Court judgment Case :- WRIT - C No. - 49301 of 2011 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Gupta, Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others,Petitioner Counsel :- Yogesh Srivastava,Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. It is clearly mentioned that grant of firearm licence is not a privilege accorded by the government(in other words, it means that it is accorded/guaranteed by the Constitution).
Also see why everybody who applies for license are not granted license.
Because of ignorance the applicants and licensing authorities about the facts of law just like you. Whenever these applicants approach High Courts, they get favorable judgments. There are countless such judgments.
There are certain criteria for issuing license, if you fall within that criteria you will be allowed the license.
Yes the criteria for disqualification are mentioned in Section 14 of Arms Act 1959. If a citizen is not disqualified under Section 14, he is to be issued the license because Article 19 of the Constitution is acknowledging arms as a fundamental right for all citizens.
No doubt you have the fundamental right to apply and the measurement whether you fall within the criteria is upon the licensing authority.
Absolutely wrong. Licensing authority is not Parliament to place itself in shoes of Parliament and start deciding on behalf of Parliament. Licensing authority is just implementing authority to implement the law as it is.
I say "licensing authority, licensing authority, licensing authority"
This child like behavior shows your closed mind, that you are not amenable to reasonable and logical thinking even in the face of facts.
Also see the role of home department and the District Magistrate, in issuing arms license.
Instead read the judgments of High Courts that have admonished and fined them for not following the law.
No, not at all simply means that you cannot carry knife even for self defence in India because you will be arrested by police for carrying illegal arms..under various provisions of IPC and Arms Act.
I disagree with the above opinion because of the following reasons:
If there is no notification under Section 4 of Arms Act 1959, then possession of arms other than firearms without license is perfectly legal provided you do not have "criminal intent".
As regards the question of police filing cases under IPC and Arms Act 1959, they are always free to file such cases regardless if you have license or not under Arms Act 1959 by coupling the matter with "criminal intent" and "suspicious circumstances". This is no reason to be irresponsible with your life and liberty, and keep yourself disarmed to allow your life and liberty suffer at the hands of criminals.
I am of the view that right to bear arms should be natural right and not a licensing right with minimum perscripttion and guidelines.
Arms are already natural and fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It needs to be noted that since arms are Fundamental Right of citizens under Article 19, there is corresponding Fundamental Duty of citizens in Article 51A(d). It is the same concept of 2nd Amendment's armed people's militia that is also present in our Constitution but has been written in a different manner. Also if one studies carefully Section 3 of Arms Act 1959 is violative of Article 20(3).