 Yeah, good evening friends and good evening friends amongst us we have Mr. Vishwanath and the and the interesting facet is that despite the fact that he's in US and it's 7am. He has readily agreed to share his knowledge on the arms act of the understandability how it's legal journey. He has taken a lot of sessions with us and it's always pleasure connecting with him. And we are so happy that even at 7am he's ready to share his knowledge and that too. For a weekend in our place in Chandigarh and all over India. So without taking much time, we request sir to share his knowledge for you on behalf of beyond law CLC and to recommend associates. Thank you Mr. Vikas. Good evening to all the viewers. The topic is very interesting. Arms Act and Arms Rules. The arms act is amended in 2019 under which many changes were made to the arms act. We got now the new set of arms rules of 2016 with repealed the earlier rules. Many of the officers of the courts, even the public in general, those who own arms and ammunition are not aware of the recent amendments to arms act and the impact of the arms rules. At first I will dwell with regard to the important amendments brought to the arms act by act of 2019 which came into force from 13-12-2019. Basically arms act is amended with regard to the context of section 2 of the act which deals with definitions clause and also sections 3, 5, 6, 8, 15, 25, 27 and 44 of the arms act of 1959. And we got new arms rules of 2016 with repealed the earlier arms rules. And as per the amendment act of 2019, a person can hold only 2 firearms in place of 3 firearms as per the old act. So the first important aspect of amendment is now an individual can hold in all 2 firearms in place of 3 firearms. That also includes any weapon which that person may have got as a legal heir or by means of inheritance or by means of what is called as heir loo. So maximum is 2, earlier it was 3 and those who are holding more than 2 weapons were directed by the amendment act to deposit the same with the government within one year from 13-12-2019. That is by the end of 2020 they were required to deposit. So beyond the date 13-12-2020, holding of any weapon beyond 2 is said to be illegal. So that is the first important aspect of amendment 2, the arms act. So in place of 3 firearms, nowadays 2 firearms and the date to deposit the remaining extra one weapon was 13-12-2020. One more important amendment is if any person takes away arms and ammunition from the police or from a police station or from a police officer or armed forces, then in that case the penalty for imprisonment, the penalty for this offense is now in the range of 10 years and sentenced to life. Taking away arms and ammunition from the police or from police station or from armed forces is now made a separate aspect of sub offense and the punishment is in the range of minimum of 10 years and up to life sentence. The next important point is the act of punishes, reckless use of weapons such as celebratory gunfires during weddings or marriages or ceremonies as per the practice of a given religion that threaten human life or personal safety of others. So for the use of weapons as celebratory gunfires during weddings etc., now the penalty is up to 2 years or they find 2 rupees, 1 lakh or both. The new act has defined the words organized crime, organized crime syndicate and also illegal trafficking in arms and ammunition. The new act as per the amendment to 25 of the arms act provides that it is illegal to trade or acquire or sell firearms and ammunitions to and from India where the firearms are not marked and the accused contract versions of the arms act. The punishment is up to 10 years from 10 years up to life as the case may be. The new act defines the words organized crime as a member of a crime doing continued unlawful activity either himself or a member of the organized crime by using unlawful means such as violence or coercion to gain economic or other benefit. As you all know, carrying on of an illegal act by group of persons is said to be doing the act with intent and here separately 25 one year provides for punishment for carrying on organized crime by the accused carrying arms and ammunition. Then the phrase organized crime syndicate is defined as consisting of two or more persons committing an organized crime. One more departure is that by the amendment to the act wherein special status is given to sports person. As per the new rules international medalist renowned shooters are allowed to keep additional weapons up to 12 under the exempted category which earlier was 7 besides two weapons which they can possess as an Indian national. If a shooter is renowned in one event then he can keep maximum of 8 in place of earlier four that is as per the amended provisions of the rules. A junior target shooter or aspiring shooter now can possess two weapons in place of one. So these important provisions are enacted by means of amendment to you and impetus to the sports persons who want to take up this important aspect of the sport. Under rule 40 of the arms rules of 2016 the shooters are empowered to possess two firearms as normal surgeons of India besides those exempted category of weapons which they can hold. And they also can purchase more number of ammunition if they are shooters for their practice in a given year. As per the new act no permit or license is required for a citizen for acquisition or to possess small arms falling under the category of curio C-U-R-I-O curio. So these are the important changes brought to the arms act and where what now the amended provisions of arms act and also new sets of arms rules. With this brief prelude I'll start now quickly the important aspect of definitions of important words which are used in the arms act. As you all know every special act is enacted by the parliament to cater to a particular special need and we have to keep in mind what are the special features of a special enactment. And in this arms act we got section 8 of the arms act which deals with what is called as a type of presumption which in law we call it as shawl presumed. We got exemptions which are three number may presume, shawl presumed and conclusive proof under the Indian evidence act. Second 8 of the act deals with shawl presumed. What the court shawl presumed in case of violation of provisions of 8 of the act is to be seen by us in due course of time. And for some special enactments they provide that unless there is sanction to prosecute the accused given by a prescribed authority the case cannot go further or that the accused may plead for his equity. So we got here also a case of a provision of the arms act which provides that for prosecution of the offence by the accused there must be obtaining of the prior sanction of the concerned official of the department as per the act. So with this we will now start quickly with regard to important definitions of the arms act that is 2 of the act. Section 2, surplus 1, surplus 8 of the act defines the word acquisition as also including hiring, borrowing or accepting as gift. So if I accept way of gift and arm or ammunition that is said to be what is called as acquisition under 2, 1, 8 of the act. So an accused cannot plead in the court that the arm or ammunition was gifted to him by somebody else because the word gift or acceptance way of gift is now within the meaning of the word acquisition. As if he has acquired, as if he has bought. So the word gift or accepting way of gift is within the word what is called as acquisition. So equation means as inclusive of hiring, borrowing or accepting as gift. So my point is we cannot import general legal knowledge when we deal with a special enactment and 2, 1, 8 of the act speaks of the word acquisition. 2B of the act speaks of the word ammunition as including ammunition for any firearm and we got 7 types of ammunitions under 2, 1, B of the act. The example source rockets, bombs, grenades, shells, missiles or article designed for torpedo service and submarine mining. So we got there 7 important types of ammunition under 2, 1, B of the act. I will not take much time to discuss all those things. 2, 1, C defines the word arms. What is called as arms? Arms is an article of any description designed or adapted as weapon for offenses or weapon for defenses. So an arm may serve 2 purposes. Weapon for offense. Number 2, weapon to commit, weapon for defense. So for self-defense the arm can be used or the same arm can be used for the purpose of what is called as commission of a crime. So a knife at home can be used for the purpose of cutting an apple or also for causing injury to any person. So that is the aspect of the word arm under 2, 1, C of the act. The act says that arm is what is called weapon for defense or weapon for offense or the case may be. But not including articles for domestic or agricultural purposes. A knife used at home is not called as an arm under 2, 1, C of the act. So also things, articles for purpose of agriculture. So a latte or an ordinary working stick are not arms under 2, 1, C of the act. The Supreme Court of India in Neel v. State of West Bengal, 1972. Yes, C.C. Criminal, page number 64, held that the word sword is an arm under 2, 1, C of the act. One more point is High Court of Delhi in Nanak Chand v. State of Delhi. That is 1992, Criminal Law Journal, Delhi, page number 55, held that Kirpan is not a knife. One more case law of the apex court is that the Supreme Court of India in Surinder v. State of Haryana, 1994. Part 4, Yes, C.C. Page 365, held that Erumian section 2, Surplus 1, Surplus B of the act. In the context of the word ammunition, the court held that a cartridge can be an ammunition for any firearm if it is a live cartridge. So the prosecution in a case before the court is required to prove that the cartridge which was found in the portion of the accused without license was a live cartridge and that the weapon, the ammunition, the what is called firearm in question was in a working condition when the same was seized by the prosecution for the offence of purchasing arms and ammunition without license or permit. So this case laws of the apex court indicate the scope of the word R, the word ammunition under 2, 1, B and 2, 1, C of the act. 2, Surplus 1, Surplus E, speaks of the word firearms and I mean you can just go through. I have got various types of firearms under the arms act which are foreign number will not take much time. 2, Surplus 1, Surplus E, A is what is called as license. Now, formerly the license were issued in physical form that is in the form of a booklet. Now that we can also have what is called as electronic mode of license that is called as electronic form of welding of the license. Surplus 2, Surplus 1, FF of the act is very important. Meaning of the word my straight in the context of arms act means only what is called as my straight under section 20 of the CRPC. 20 of CRPC states that as good as my straight is what is called as my straight for the purpose of CRPC and the same meaning is imported in the arms act under 2, 1, FF of the act. So the word my straight according in the arms act must not be confused with the words which we use in court. Namely my straight of the regular court, regular court of under the hierarchy of the high courts, but it is a my straight under the aspect of the revenue subdivision of a moment. So my straight means what is called as is equal to my straight under 20 of the CRPC. So it's in 2, 1, B, 2, 1 heads speaks of what is called as prohibited arms. And with that the next important point is 2, 1, K of the act. What is called as a transfer under the arms act. Transfer under the arms act may be of four types. Letting on higher lending, giving and parting with the custody of the arms and ammunition. So transfer as per the arms act also includes what is called as giving and parting with the portion of the arms and ammunition. So don't keep in mind what the word transfer means in common legal parlance. Here transfer means either letting on higher lending, giving, parting with portion of a given arm or ammunition. So this will take now quickly the important aspects of sections 3 to 12 which are what is called as the sections with which we should be familiar. And section 3 speaks of what is called as license to acquire and possess firearms and ammunition. So chapter 2 sections 3 to 12 deals with the heading acquisition, position, manufacture, sale, import and export of arms and ammunition. That provides that which should have separate permit to acquire, to possess, to manufacture, for sale also by a vendor, for importer, for import and for exporter to export of any arms and ammunition. So there is a separate set of issuance of licenses to cater to separate sets of needs of the concerned applicant for rent of license. So 3 speaks of license for acquisition and position of firearms and ammunition. So you want to acquire firearms and ammunition and you want to possess firearms and ammunition. That now says you must have license. Ex is owner of an arm. He is licensed. He is leaving India to USA for 3 months. He wants to give it to his friend. So the friend to possess that arms and ammunition for 3 months must apply to the concerned department and obtain permission. So license for acquisition to acquire or you want to possess any firearm and ammunition is required under 3 of the act. So no person shall acquire or have in his position or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds a license in this behalf. So this is the dinner of 3 of the act. So with that any person holding any weapon beyond 2, beyond 13, 12, 2019 as per section 3, surplus 2, is required to deposit the extra weapon, extra firearm with the nearest police station or with the concerned named authorities under 3, 2 of the act. Within period of 1 year that is within 13, 12, 2020 the extra weapon or firearm must be deposited by the concerned person. So with that, section 3, surplus 3 of the act states that these provisions have no application to a dealer in firearms or any member of a rifle club or rifle association. So for section 3 of the act the punishment is on section 25, 1A of the arms act. So 3 of the act is important, 25, 1A is the finger clause and for prosecuting the accused under 3 of the act punishment is 25, 1A of the act. What the act provides that is that there must be previous sanction of the district magistrate to prosecute the accused under 3 of the act. So for 3 of the act evaluation only that requires previous sanction of the deputy commissioner or the district magistrate of the district to prosecute the accused. So 3 of the act contravention punishment is 25, 1A and 3 of the act says that there must be prior sanction to prosecute given by the deputy commissioner or by the district magistrate under section 39 of the act. So section 3, 25, 1A and 39 of the act they go together and they go hand in hand. The first court has held in many cases that any charged fight by the prosecution on 3 of the arms act without prior sanction of the deputy commissioner is wide, is not as per law and that the acquittal on the aspect of non-obtaining of previous sanction. From the deputy commissioner of a given district. So 4 speaks of license to acquire and possess arms of specified categories. 5 speaks of license for manufacture, obtaining, procuring or for sale, transfer, conversion, repair or testing or proving etc. of arms and ammunition. So fight this with the aspect of license taken for manufacture, obtaining, procuring or for sale of arms and ammunition. So even for repairing also that requires permission, repairing, testing, proving, conversion of a weapon into some other type for all these things that requires permission. So under the new amendment act of 2019, the words added are even for manufacture of arms and ammunition that requires permit, even for obtaining of arms and ammunition that requires permission. So also to procure for procurement of arms and ammunition also that requires permission. So the words manufacturing, obtaining and procuring these 3 are added in 5 of the act by amendment act of 2019. So 5 is of a greater magnitude that covers need of license for manufacturing, obtaining, procuring for purpose of sale or for transfer. Conversion, repairs or testing or proving of arms and ammunition. So with this the next point is 6 of the act, license for shortening of barrel of firearm or conversion of imitation firearm into firearm. So to shorten the length of barrel of firearm that requires permission of conversion of imitation firearm into a regular firearm for use as a firearm that requires permit that is license. 7 of act is prohibition of acquisition of possession or of manufacture or sale of prohibited arms or ammunition. So there cannot be illegal selling of prohibited weapons. So son of the act. The office court in the case of Aravind Kumar Sharma versus Union of India that is 2016 part 15 SCC 115 in the context of APIL filed by an advocate practicing in the Supreme Court of India. The advocate alleged in the pay all to the fact that there is illegal selling of prohibited or NSP bore weapons obtained by army personnel through central ordinance depot short form is COD Jebalpur on the basis of order passed by the allotment committee. His further complaint was that the said weapons were sold by army personnel to the public in general and that public having criminal background including anti-social elements and terrorists in breach of arms rules and powers of arms act were acquiring the same the Supreme Court of India in this case stepped in that the said order of the allotment committee is bad and long and that it has got a greater impact on the society. So for details you can go through the decision towards the round six part 15 SCC 115 Aravind Kumar Sharma versus Union of India. One more point is that can there be absolute prohibition by the government to possess what is called as a prohibited arm or not. That's the question because certain seven speaks of prohibition of acquisition of possession of or manufacture or sale of prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition. So whether some of that says that there is a absolute bar of prohibition of having what's called as a prohibited arm or prohibited ammunition. In this context the High Court of Allahabad in Ganesha Chandr Bhatt versus DM Al Mora that is 1993 part 21 Allahabad Law Reporter page 300 in the context of section 13 of the act also held that the authority consent must consider all the relevant facts at the conferences and must not act arbitrarily in disposing of application by the applicant for grant of relations to possess what is called as prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition. So if as per law the applicant meets all the requirements under the presence of 7 and 13 of the act then the High Court held that the authority cannot refuse to grant license under 13 of the act permitting the license to hold prohibited arms or prohibited ammunition. Then it is very important prohibition of sale prohibition of sale or transfer of firearms not bearing marks of identification. This is amended in 2019. So under 8 of the act no person or no vendor, no persons all obliterate, remove, alter or force any name, number or mark of identification stamped or otherwise shown on a firearm or ammunition. Every firearm or ammunition has marked on it what is called as the name of the manufacturer and all those particulars. So 8-1 says that no persons shall obliterate, remove, alter or force any name, number or other mark of identification stamped or otherwise shown on a firearm or ammunition. And 8-2 says no persons shall sell. So no vendor shall sell or transfer any firearm which does not bear the opposite marks. So a vendor of arms and ammunition shall sell only those arms and ammunition which contain or which have on it or on them what is called as the name, number and other marks of identification. 8-3 is very important. Here we come across what is called as what the code shall presume. So 8-3 is very important. 8-3 says whenever any person has in his position any firearm without such name of the manufacturer or serial number or mark of identification as the case may be then it shall be presumed by the court unless the contrary is proved that it is the said person who has in his position any firearm that he has obliterated, removed, altered or forced that name, number or mark of identification. So 8-3 says that if I possess a firearm which does not contain the name of the manufacturer or there is a razor of name of the manufacturer or there is tampering with mark of identification of either the serial number, name of manufacturer etc. The codes are presumed until the contrary is proved by the accused that the so called accused only obliterated, removed, altered or forced the same. So 8-3 is very important under the general trainer law for proof of IPC violations or IPC offenses. The law states that the standard of proof for IPC offenses is proof beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution shall prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt in the context of target filed by the police under sections, under presence of the IPC and its violations. Under arms act in the context of 8 of the act prohibition of sale or transfer of firearms not bearing identification marks is amended in 2019. So that this 8 of the act, 8-3 of the act, this particular strict proof of the case, proof beyond all reasonable doubt is diluted in as much as in this case of 8-3 of the act the accused shall dislodge as to how the weapon namely firearm and his position. So 8-3 is diluted under this aspect of amendment and the strict proof that is proof beyond all reasonable doubt as in the case of IPC is rather made dilute under 8 of the arms act. With this we will take into account 9 of the act that is prohibition of acquisition or possession or for sale or transfer to a young person and other types of persons named in section 9 of the act. So 9 of the act states that there cannot be a blanket sale by a vendor in arms and ammunition and that the word young person is defined in 9 of the act. So there can be no equation or version of certain types of firearms to young person who is defined as a person less than 21 years. Then 10 of the act speaks of license for import or export of arms and ammunition by sea, land or air etc. 11 speaks of power to private import or export of firearm by the central government and 12 speaks of the aspect of power of government to regulate the use of airspace for transport over India or any part of India, any type of arms and ammunition. So with this we have completed the aspect of sections 3 to 12 of the act and with that sections 13 to 18 it speaks of aspect of the application for grant of license by applicant for issuance of a given type of permit or permission. And as per the amend governance of the act the permit issued now is for a period of 5 years in place of earlier period of 3 years. Under 15 of the arms act amended 4 years ago the license will be issued now for a period of 5 years in place of 3 years with effect from 13, 12, 2019. So now license issued will be for a period of 5 years in place of the earlier period of 3 years. The question is what is legal effect of section 15, 3 of the act? Whether application for renewal of a license file when applicant is be treated as a case of application for grant of a fresh license or not was the question which was before the High Court of Bombay in a given case. So High Court of Bombay in Mohanlal, Chandulal, Sarai versus state of Maharashtra, 1993 Maharashtra law journal page 365 held that the legal effect of section 15 suppose 3 of the arms act is that the renewal application of the applicant is to be considered as an application for grant of a fresh license. One more case on the point is the Supreme Court of India in Ram Kripal Singh versus state of UP 1987 Allahabad law journal page 1209 held that renewal of license cannot be refused upon the mayor ground of delay in applying for it. So these case laws indicate that the authority empowered to renew license should keep in mind the important facts of the concerned case and you must keep in mind the aspect of poisons of the act. And there shall not be disallowing the claim of the applicant for renewal or grant of license on ulterior motives. The question is can there be cancellation of license which would apply the department to a person to possess arms and ammunition without hearing him. So order of cancellation of arms license under 15 three of the act is to be passed only after giving to the licensee and opportunity of being heard. There cannot be so more to cancellation of license issued by the department but there should be calculation of the license only after hearing the licensee. That is the ratio of high court of Punjab and Haryana in Daoba arms company versus state of Punjab 1992 part one crimes page number 718. So with that the next important aspects of the matter I will just highlight. The question is use of firearms for self defense cannot be said to be misused and cannot be said to be misused of firearm. So the high court of Allahabad in Sangat Singh versus commissioner. Kumar division 1991 ACC page number 666 held that use of firearms for self defense cannot be said to be misuse of firearms. So with that we will take into account next week that is who can demand production of arms and ammunition. So under 19 of the act only some persons are empowered to demand production of license for carrying arms or ammunition. That is number one is by any officer of the police station. So any police officer can demand or any other officer especially empowered in the behalf. So officer of the police department or other officer specially empowered under the act. They have got the power to demand production of license by a person to carry ammunition or arms that is 19 of the act. 20 of that speaks with arrest of persons conveying arms or ammunition under suspicious cases. Who can arrest persons conveying arms and ammunition under suspicious circumstances. That is by a magistrate measured means as to the magistrate under 20 of the CRPC. Number two any police officer number three any other public servant under 21 of the IPC. Any person employed or working upon a railway aircraft vessel vehicle or any other means of conveyance. And they can arrest without warrant and seize such arms and ammunition. So persons empowered to arrest a person carrying on arms and ammunition under suspicious cases. Or what's called as five-fold a number a magistrate is a magistrate. Police officer any other public servant officers persons employed in railway aircraft vessel vehicle or any other means of conveyance. So with this the important aspect is namely power of search under presence of 22 of the arms act. Search of the house or premises and seizure by a magistrate of arms and ammunition. So every search under the arms act should be by or in the presence of a magistrate. So the important point is search of house of the premises of the accused and seizure of the same shall be by or in the presence of a magistrate. Or by or in the presence of some other officer especially empowered in this regard by the central government. So search and search of house or premises and seizure should be by a magistrate of the arms and ammunition. So by a magistrate or in his presence or in the presence of a magistrate or other person empowered by the central government in the above regard. So this is very very important. So 22 search of the house or premises and seizure of arms and ammunition by a magistrate or by especially empowered officer. 23 speaks of search of vessels, vehicles, etc. by any police officer or by specially empowered officer or by executive magistrate. So with this we take into account next the offenses under the act that is 25 to 33 of the act. This is the aspect of the last leg of the present discussion. 25 speaks of punishment for some offenses. So 25 is amended in 2019 and in this amendment of 2019 various important things are brought in force. 25 of 1B is added as per the proposed amendment. So if any person by force takes any firearm from the police or from armed forces then here the punishment shall not be less than 10 years and may extend up to life sentence and both. Any person unlawfully taking away firearm from the police or from armed forces. Now here the punishment is on a very high scale not less than 10 years and up to life sentence. So this is added to the arms act by amendment by adding section 25 1AB in 2019. So some amendments are brought in force in 25 of the act. And so also it speaks of commission of offense by a member of organized crime syndicate. So I discussed in the beginning what's called as organized crime syndicate, member of organized crime, all those things. So with this 25 of the act is completed. Then the question is whether the police officers under the Delhi Special Police Establishment have the power to investigate for the offenses and poisons of the arms are not in the question. So that is called as extension of power of Delhi Special Police Establishment. So the Delhi Special Police Establishment are empowered under various government orders issued by various governments, state governments. They are empowered to investigate for the offenses or sections 25 to 30 of the arms act. So as regards the state of Karnataka, because I worked in state of Karnataka quite some time. And here outside of Karnataka, as per notification dated 411 1986, the powers and jurisdiction of members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment get to be conferred. And that the powers of the Delhi Special Police Establishment are empowered to investigate and accused on sections 25 to 30 of the arms act. And also second five of in explosives act of 1884. The question is when the court can convict the accused under 25 of the arms act, what thinks must the court keep in mind? On this point I got the case law of the apex court in Guna Manthalal, Guna Manthalal was the state of M.P. 1972 part 2 SCC page 194. In this case the apex court held that the first precondition to track the 251A is the element of intention, conscious or knowledge with which a person possessed the firearm before it can be very constant on offense. Number two is that he must have what's called as the intent to commit the offense. So as per the avoidance of Supreme Court of India, the important point is intention, conscious or knowledge with regard to the weapon in question and he having control over the gun. Even though the person who uses the gun may use the gun at the instance of the accused person. So that is the ratio of the case of the apex court in Guna Manthalal was the state of M.P. The important point is that mere fact of position of gun and cartridges from the accused without proving that the gun was in a working condition and that the seized cartridges were alive. The apex court in the case of Jaspal Singh versus state of Punjab 1998 part 7 SCC 289 held that the conviction of the accused is bad in law. So the apex court in the case of Jaspal Singh held that the prosecution should prove that the seized gun was in a working condition and that the seized cartridges were also live cartridges. And without proof of those two important aspects, the apex court held that the conviction of the accused under 25th onset is not proper. So I will not multiply the cases on 25th act. I have just given you a bird's eye view of what is the aspect of ratio of the relations of the Supreme Court of India on the given aspect of the avoidance of the arms act. So with this, the next important point is the absence of any expert opinion about the status of recovered cartridges does not affect the conviction under 5th act for being found unauthorized in the position of a revolver in the notified area. This is the case of apex court in Anil versus state of Maharashtra 1996 part 2 SCC page number 589 whether the son can make use of gun of the father with the licensee in exercise of right to defend person of the father. Whether it requires permission. The question which was before the apex court in the case of Bhagawan Saurabh versus state of MP 1992 part 2 SCC page number 406. In this case, the apex court held that using a gun of father in exercise of right to defend person of the father cannot be considered as possessing an arm without a licensee. So son using the weapon of his father with licensee for the purpose of defending his father in an attack by some person, the apex court held that that requires no permit or license for the son to use the weapon of the father for the right to defend his father in case of requirement. So with this Danish part and point is namely 35 of the act criminal responsibility of person in occupation of premises. So in some cases the owner of premises was given the premises on lease to a tenant. It was aware of the tenant using the premises for purpose of storing or for purpose of carrying the illegal activity of dealing in arms and ammunitions. The law states that that owner shall inform the police of use of the premises of his ownership by the tenant for carrying on the illegal activity. So that is called as criminal responsibility of person in occupation of premises and liberty of the owner of premises to intimate if is aware of existence of arms and ammunitions in his premises. With this 39 is a previous sanction of the district magistrate to prosecute the accused under section 3 of the act violation are told in the beginning. So for violation of 3 of the act the act says that to prosecute the accused there shall be prior sanction of the deputy commissioner feeling which the accused is required to be acquitted. And that is the ratio in the case of Moindar Singh versus state of Haryana. 1996 part 11 SCC 369. Absence of previous sanction under 39 of the act for prosecution of the accused under 3 of the act and consequent conviction under section 26 of the arms act. That which section 6 of TADA was held by apex court as illegal in this case of Moindar Singh versus state of Haryana. So with that the last section is 45 of the act. Act not to apply in some cases. There are 2 cases in which this act has no application. Number 1 is arms or ammunition on board any sea going vessel or any aircraft and forming part of ordinary armament or equipment of such vessel or aircraft. Namely as an original equipment of the vessel or ship or aircraft that requires no prior permission. If a ship is sold by a shipbuilder to a ship buyer which is fitted with arms or ammunition as part of ordinary fitment of the ship or if an aircraft is sold by an aircraft manufacturing company to a purchaser which is fitted with ordinary armament or equipment of the aircraft then for those fitted what they call arms and ammunition in the particular aircraft or vessel as part of the vehicle being sold as an original equipment. The act says that poisons of arms act have no application. So also any public servant on duty possessing arms and ammunition namely a PSI or a CPI etc. So they are empowered to possess it because of their duty that requires no permission. So also a person possessing arms and ammunition under order of central government personal permission. So also members of National Carrot Corps NCC Act of 1948. So these 4 types of persons in these 4 cases the act says that there is no need to apply for permission under 45 of the act. So this arms rules came to force on 15th of July 2016. So I got now the new arms rules and the old arms rules of 1962 is repealed in its entirety. So rule 2 of the arms rules defines various words. So it's in 2, so plus 3 of the arms rules speaks of what is called as antique small arm as meaning firearms manufactured before 1899. So they define what's called as antique small arm then they also defined here. So in section 2, so plus 17 meaning of curio. Curio means a small arm manufactured at least 50 years prior to the current date. So any small arm manufactured prior to 1972 are certified by the curator of a government regulated museum. Or that devices at least half of its monetary value or that derives at least half of its monetary value. Or the fact it is novel, rare, bizarre or associated with or historical figure etc. So with this the other aspects of the rules I mean they are mainly concerned with the aspect of use by the relating department. And rule 103 speaks of confiscation, capture or seizure of firearms and ammunition by the firearm burials. 104 speaks of destruction of firearms and ammunition. So with this we'll take into account a few case laws on the aspect of arms act. That is Istikar versus State of UP 2012 part 12 SSCC pay number 307. Section 7 supplies A of JJ Act of 2000, 3rd of 2002 of the IPC and 25 of the arms act. In this case the first court held that the court must pass order on the application filed by an offender on the point of his geminality. In this case one of the accused before the court filed application saying that I was less than 18 years when the offender was already committed. And he filed application asking the court to give a finding at first on the application to declare him as to whether he is an accused above 18 years or whether he is less than 18 years. In this case the first court held that the court must give first finding on the application filed by the offender on the point of his geminality. And then was it further if it holds that the so called offender is above 18 years. So with this I completed the aspect of the arms act and arms source and I focused mainly on the aspect of recent amendments to the arms act and the principle of law as per the arms rules of 2016. If the viewers have got any doubt on the aspect of the arms act because they say specialised act and we could not complete it within one hour I have taken you with the important facets of the arms act especially the amend provisions. And also what the court has stated in the context of proof of offences and the presence of the arms act. If any doubts are there, you may kindly. Yes sir, we have to recognize. Good evening sir, thank you so much. Good evening. It was a very scholarly presentation sir, especially this piece of enactment you have thrown a lot of lights on the recent amendments. Because for me also I teach regularly in our High Court Academy for officers. And my endeavor was here to state about the case laws of the High Court and especially keeping in mind the amendments. In fact I told Mr. Vikas that we will frame the worldings of today's subject as amendments to the arms act and new arms source. And he told that no no let it be arms act only, you can cover everything whatever you want it. So I have done my two jobs telling to the audience all the important features of the arms act plus amendments. And my request is don't just go through the cases involving arms act as a regular criminal case. Because burden of proof in case of IPC violations is strict beyond all these doubled out. Here for 8 of the act contravention that is diluted. Sometimes we may miss the set aspect and a case of what you call activital will be convicted under 8 of the act. Because accused must step in the witness box and state as to how in what manner the weapon which he purchased. Its serial number or mark of distinction etc. came to be erased or came to be changed as a case may be. In fact Dr. Victor was slightly joined lead. I was telling Sir is in US and right now it was when we started the session it was 6, 7 a.m. So I said that his passion to take things forward. So kind of Sir to log in early morning I think it should be 6 o'clock when Sir started the session early morning. Yeah it was 7.30, 7.30. So were you limiting the number of arms opposition as any effect from 3 to 2 arms? Because the government of India thought that there is holding of large number of arms. And many arms are produced by many persons without license. At least by lessening the number 3 to 2. So one extra arm by a person who is licensed to possess that is given back to the government. Lord with the government. So and there could be also a huge number. I don't know the exact statistics. One arm extra in base of 3 now it is 2. On an islander basis it will also mean a very huge number. And what the government thought that one is enough for self defense. We can have 2 that's all. But only more than 2 is not permissible and not required also. And by keeping in house or the armory more and more of weapons than required for use that leads to lending it unofficially. And there may be use of those weapons though licensed by somebody else. So to do away with further times they just made it from 3 to 2. And one more point is there is the law skill use of these arms and ammunition form now formally in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. There they had given special status. You can own it. You can have it because for the self defense. But now from 13-12-2019 it is amended. And I think very large number of people that deposited extra arm the third arm firearm with the department. If they possess now also they have to deposit back with the government. So with one application for condoning of the delay in reporting or in lodging the third arm third firearm. And government will accept it and condone the delay also now. Anybody possessing 3 of firearms now is said to commit offense for holding one extra firearm with a license previously. And now that he is kept in what's called as D-Lacent function. Can you say something about Sanjay that's case sir if we could recollect because he was convicted under the GAMS Act. Yes that is Tata Act. Tata. There is implications of the Tata Act and also arms act both are being put together. There also the office court held that there is a conscious position of the arms, conscious position of arms. For the purpose of what you call commission of terrorist act under the Tata Act. The Supreme Court scaled down the punishment to a lower level compared to the punishment awarded by the Tata Court at Mumbai. And even now we have got a case wherein what is the role of private security personnel employed by some persons. They use the arms because they are empowered to possess arms and ammunition. They use it. They in the case of encounter or safety of the concerned person forum they are there. They shoot. What is legal effect of that particular what you call murder of persons by this private security personnel. This question was there before the Supreme Court of India. And the Supreme Court of India thought fit that on this branch of law there is no case law. So private security personnel employed by various persons employed by various agencies if they resort to use of arms and ammunition. And they cause death. See police officer in encounter is empowered to even shoot at the accused if he is trying to escape. And here also you know that false encounters the Supreme Court has told took place in a given case. But here in case of the police personnel I mean private security personnel they make use of this arms and ammunition. There we have got the case law of the office court. In this case the office court held that the government of India must give proper. The government of India must legislate on this aspect. That is the case of firing incident by private security personnel reported in 2015 part 14. Yes C.C. Pay number 460. In this case section 2 surplus F. The surplus H of H. Section 5, 6, 9 and 10 of private security agencies regulation act was involved. And so also use of what is called as arms. Sections 3, 4, 13, 14, 17, 27, 30 of arms act was also involved. Then these are the four of the IPC that is firing incident by private security personnel 2015 part 14. Yes C.C. Pay number 460. The office court held that on this point of use of this arms use of arms and ammunition by this private security personnel. There's no longer point if they cause death what is legal effect who can be made liable because they work for some agency. And in the descent of the duty they perform the duty. What about liability of the employer? See a company employs so on. So the employer doesn't act we speak of acres liability of the employer for act of the employee. So this case you can just go through. This is the case on the point of firing incident by private security personnel. Regarding the case of Sanjay that which we just discussed the case is Sanjay that versus the state of Maharashtra. 2013 part 15. Yes C.C. Pay number 240. 2013 part 15. Yes C.C. Pay number 240 Sanjay that versus Maharashtra. This exercise the 25,1A and 1B of arms sector and also data. Thank you sir on behalf of beyond the policy and recruitment SSS for sharing your knowledge and also on behalf of all the participants who are watching us live on the YouTube as well as on the Facebook. And those who are involved want subsequently on the YouTube. thank Mr. Vikas and all the viewers because they made me to read once again, revise here and tell to you what detail I knew about Tom's act and empowerment on any aspect if it is a periodical that's good for the person who want to empower also and it's a great opportunity for all of us to discuss and know if there is any new facet of a given enactment or act. I thank once again the viewers and also Mr. Vikas and more particularly Mr. Thirvekram who is I mean he asked the questions which were very live and the important aspect is a person who is well aware if I ask questions that will be again a foot thought for the speaker also and I thank Professor Thirvekram because he's having in-depth knowledge in this special act and many of us many judges also I mean don't mistake I'm not saying many many of us how just we read with you which have been mined IPC proof means proof beyond all reasonable doubt for special enactments we forget so my important aspect in every lecture in aspect of special enactment is tell it at first what is proof beyond all reasonable doubt what is called as standard of proof in a special enactment though which is what's called as a penal in nature and then go forward so thank you thank you very much