Taking suo moto cognizance of the use of unlicensed weapons in Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court has said that this trend of unlicensed use of weapons is disturbing element in a civilized society.
Justice KM Joseph and Justice BV Nagaratna’s bench has asked the Uttar Pradesh government to reply through an affidavit within four weeks that when and how many cases were registered under the Arms Act or other appropriate law in connection with the seizure of unlicensed weapons?
Apart from that, what measures have been taken by the government to root out the problem of unlicensed weapons?
The bench remarked that unlike in the US, it is not a fundamental right to bear arms in India. Our constitution makers did not make any such provision in the constitution.
Justice Joseph said that I am from Kerala. But there all this is unheard of and unseen. On this, Justice Nagaratna said that this is a reflection of feudal thinking.
A Bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna took note of “the evil of unlicensed firearms”, while hearing a bail plea by a 73-year-old man accused of murdering a victim by firing a gun.
The Allahabad High Court denied bail to the petitioner in a case in which he and other co-accused allegedly engaged in indiscriminate firing on the complainant and seven others. According to the prosecution, this was done due to the previous enmity between the parties.
The petitioner argued in the plea that the High Court ignored the fact that as per the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report, the bullet fired did not match the gun recovered from him.
Furthermore, a co-accused in the case had already been granted regular bail. He also submitted that he had been in custody for more than 5 years.
In this regard, the petition argued that the High Court overlooked the petitioner’s deteriorating health as he grew older. Therefore, his continued incarceration clearly violated his fundamental human rights, as guaranteed by Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 21 of the Constitution.
