Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jul 25, 2003

About Us
Contact Us
Other States
News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Other States - New Delhi Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

High Court to hear airgun licence case afresh

By Nirnimesh Kumar

NEW DELHI JULY 24. Confirming a stay on the operation of a judgment whereby a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had quashed a notification under which people could possess airguns or pistols without licences, the High Court has said that it would hear the entire case afresh.

A Division Bench of the Court comprising the Chief Justice, B.C. Patel, and Justice A.K. Sikri fixed September 24 for hearing arguments in the matter.

On a public interest litigation filed by People for Animals, a trust, a Division Bench comprising the then Chief Justice, S.B. Sinha, and Justice A.K. Sikri had in April 2002 quashed the Union Government's notification of 1961 providing for possessing airguns or pistols without licences.

The National Rifle Association of India, an autonomous sports body promoting shooting in the country, moved the High Court challenging the judgment on the ground, among others, that the court did not have the power to quash the notification as the power to grant exemption from the necessity of licences for holding the gun or pistol vested in the Government.

Counsel for the Association, Sushil Dutt Salwan, also submitted that the Association and the Air Gun and Air Pistol Manufacturers' Association of India, engaged in the promotion of the game and manufacture and sale of the gun or pistol, were not heard.

The Association also alleged that People for Animals had concealed some facts related to the matter from the court and that there was a collusion between the petitioner and the then Union Minister of State for Social Welfare and Empowerment, Maneka Gandhi, as she was also chairperson of the trust at the time.

The People for Animals had challenged the notification on the ground that free availability of the gun or pistol was being used to shoot animals.

Challenging the argument, Mr. Salwan submitted that the Wildlife Act was there to prevent the killing of animals.

After hearing both parties, the High Court had in November last year granted an interim stay on the operation of the judgment.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Other States

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu