The Allahabad High Court has made it clear that a licensed firearm is not meant for celebratory firing at weddings or religious events. Upholding the cancellation of an arms licence, the court said every licence holder is responsible for maintaining proper records of ammunition purchased and used.
The case involved Akhilesh Kumar, who challenged the cancellation of his arms licence after authorities found he could not account for 757 cartridges. His licence, issued in 2000, came under scrutiny during an inspection in 2019 when officials sought details of his ammunition usage.
Records showed that Kumar had purchased 857 cartridges over the years. However, when asked to produce them, he could account for only 57 live cartridges and 33 empty shells. To explain the missing ammunition, he told authorities that the cartridges had been used for target practice as well as firing during weddings, Chhath Puja and Durga Puja celebrations.
The explanation failed to convince the licensing authority, which cancelled his licence under Section 17 of the Arms Act. The decision was later upheld by the appellate authority.
Before the High Court, Kumar argued that when his licence was granted in 2000, there was no requirement to preserve used cartridges and therefore he could not be penalised for not maintaining such records.
Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery rejected the contention, observing that an arms licence is a privilege and not an absolute right. The court said licence holders are obligated to comply with all regulatory conditions governing the possession and use of firearms. It further noted that these obligations were reinforced under the Arms Rules, 2016.
In its July 29 order, the court specifically disapproved of using licensed weapons for celebratory firing. It observed that firearms cannot be used for “joy firing” during marriages or religious festivals and that such conduct amounts to misuse of a licensed weapon.
The court concluded that Kumar’s inability to account for 757 cartridges was a serious lapse. Holding that the missing ammunition clearly indicated misuse, it ruled that the cancellation of his arms licence was fully justified and declined to interfere with the orders passed by the authorities.
