Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court, noting an increase in the presence of firearms on court premises causing concerns for public peace and safety, issued an array of directions on Tuesday to regulate licensing and entry of weapons on court grounds.

The bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed the order in a plea against cancellation of the arms license of a young lawyer. 

The single judge bench directed all District Judges and Judicial Officers in Uttar Pradesh to register cases under the Arms Act against individuals, including litigants and lawyers, carrying arms in the court premises. They are also required to promptly request the District Magistrate/Licensing Authority to cancel the relevant arms licenses.

Court ordered that District Judges, Judicial Officers, and District Court Security In-Charge must take steps for registration of FIRs against those carrying arms on court premises and should swiftly forward such report to the Licensing Authority for immediate arms license cancellation.

Court emphasised that any person found carrying ‘arms’ in the entire court premises including common areas, court rooms, lawyers’ chambers, bar associations, canteens and other public areas within the entire court premises would be deemed to be constituting breach of ‘public peace’ or ‘public safety’ for the purpose of exercise of powers under Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act.

In the case at hand, the petitioner, a young lawyer enrolled in 2018, had been charged with an offence under Section 188 IPC read with section 30 of The Arms Act for carrying arms in the court premises. Consequently, the Licensing Authority cancelled the petitioner's arm licence. 

While doing so, the Licensing Authority also noticed the general directions given by the high court on January 2, 2020 in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) titled “In Re Suo Moto Relating to Security and Protection in All Court Campuses in the State of UP".

The petitioner, seeking relief before the high court, argued that right to keep arms is a right necessary for preservation of life, liberty and property. Citing the inherent challenges of the profession compounded by the annoyance of litigating parties, he asserted that as a practicing advocate, his life was at risk.

While dismissing the petition, the high court highlighted that in the recent past, several incidents of the lawyers carrying and misusing the arms inside the court premises have attracted the attention of the courts and it has been held that arms license is merely a privilege granted by the State and is not a right of an individual.

Court added that this privilege is subject to various restrictions enumerated under the Act, the Rules, 2016, and in particular Rule 614-A of The General Rules (Civil), which specifically bars any person who is not belonging to the police force to carry or have in his possession any arms in the ‘court premises’.

Case Title: Amandeep Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others