Right to Possess Firearm Is a Privilege, Not a Fundamental Right – Bombay High Court

In a significant judgment, the High Court of Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction, pronounced its decision on a writ petition challenging the rejection of an arms license application. The court, in its ruling on Writ Petition No.976 of 2021, stated that “The right to possess a firearm is a privilege, not a fundamental right. This view finds support in various cases, and generally, granting a license should be the rule and refusal an exception, for reasons recorded in writing.”

The petitioner, Kunal Vinod Deshpande, a 40-year-old businessman from Kolhapur, Maharashtra, had sought an arms license under Section 13 of the Arms Act, 1959, citing the need for self-protection and carrying cash for his construction and scrap trading businesses. However, his application was rejected based on a police report that did not recommend granting the license for self-protection.

In the judgment pronounced by Hon’ble Justice Amit Borkar, the court emphasized that the opportunity for an oral hearing need not be provided in cases where the decision relates to the grant of a license and has no civil consequences. The court clarified that the right to seek an arms license is a privilege and not a fundamental right, and the term “good reason” in Section 13 should be interpreted based on the object and purpose of the Arms Act, 1959.

Justice Amit Borkar, while outlining the parameters for granting an arms license, highlighted the importance of considering the genuineness of the applicant’s need, physical and mental condition, and proximity to wildlife sanctuaries or national parks. The court also emphasized that the absence of a threat to the person or property of the applicant should not be a criterion for refusal under Sections 13 and 14 of the Arms Act, 1959.

The court further set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the concerned authority for a fresh decision, instructing them to consider the relevant factors laid down in the judgment and provisions of the Arms Act, 1959.

This ruling holds significant implications for those seeking arms licenses in Maharashtra and highlights the importance of a thorough examination of applicants’ genuine needs while determining their eligibility to possess firearms. The judgment reaffirms that the right to possess a firearm is contingent upon reasonable restrictions and considerations in the interest of public safety.

Date of Decision: 25 July 2023

Kunal Vinod Deshpande vs Divisional Commissioner,