SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 925

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.C. Sharma, Sachin Shankar Magadum, JJ.
Capt. Chethan Y.K. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 11948/2021 (GM-RES-PIL)
Decided On : 22-09-2021

Advocates Appeared:
B.V. Vidyulatha, Advocate, M.B. Naragund, Advocate, Gowtham Dev C. Ullal, Advocate, Vijaykumar A. Patil, Advocate, S. Praveen, Advocate, A.S. Ponnanna, Advocate, L.S. Manjunath, Advocate, Sajan Povayya, Advocate, M.P. Gagan Ganapathi, Advocate, M.T. Nanaiah, Advocate, B.N. Balasubramanya, Advocate, Sajanthi Sajan Povayya, Advocate, M. Dhyan Chinnappa, Advocate

The classification of "every person of Coorg Race" and "every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg" was based on intelligible differentia and had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Arms Act, 1959.

Headnote:

Notification issued by the Government of India granting exemption to every person of Coorg Race and every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg from the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, is upheld.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an ex-army officer, filed a petition challenging the validity of the notification issued by the Government of India granting exemption to every person of Coorg Race and every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg from the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959. The petitioner contended that the notification was violative of Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the notification was not violative of Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the classification of "every person of Coorg Race" and "every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg" was based on intelligible differentia and had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Arms Act, 1959. The Court also found that the exemption granted was subject to certain terms and conditions, and was not indefinite.

Issues: 1. Whether the notification issued by the Government of India granting exemption to every person of Coorg Race and every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg from the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, was violative of Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the classification of "every person of Coorg Race" and "every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg" was based on intelligible differentia and had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Arms Act, 1959?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the notification was not violative of Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the classification of "every person of Coorg Race" and "every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg" was based on intelligible differentia and had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Arms Act, 1959. The Court also found that the exemption granted was subject to certain terms and conditions, and was not indefinite. 2. The Court found that the classification of "every person of Coorg Race" and "every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg" was based on intelligible differentia and had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Arms Act, 1959. The Court noted that the Kodava community was a martial race and had been granted exemptions from the Arms Act since pre-independence. The Court also noted that the Jamma tenure-holders were also granted exemptions from the Arms Act since pre-independence.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner before this Court, who is an ex-army officer, resident of Galibeedu village of Madikeri Taluk in Kodagu District, has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the notification issued by the Government of India bearing No.SO.3872(E), dtd. 29/10/2019 continuing the arms exemption granted to 'Coorg/Kodava Race' and 'Jamma tenure-holders' claiming it to be violative of Articles, 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution.

2. The petitioner's contention is that during the British regime the system of licence and exemptions were brought after the 1857 War and the British Government enacted Act No.31/1860, which was known as 'Disarming Act' repealing the earlier Arms Act, 28 of 1857. The British Government granted exemptions to Kodagas/Kodavas and few other Jamma Ryots vide notification dtd. 26/2/1861.

3. It has been stated that in the year 1878 the British Government enacted Act No.11/1878 known as 'The Indian Arms Act' and again exemption was granted from obtaining a licence in respect of certain category of arms to persons belonging to Coorg Race and Jamma tenure-holders. The Arms Rules were also enacted i.e., Indian Arms Rules, 1909 and various notifications were issued from time to time granting exemptions to certain category of persons. The petitioner further stated that after Independence, vide notification dtd. 6/7/1963 and 26/12/1966, again exemptions were granted.

4. It is the petitioner's contention that the Arms Act, 1959 came into force on 1/10/1962. However, under the Act of 1959 also, in exercise of powers conferred under Sec. 41, exemptions were granted by issuing notification dtd. 6/7/1963 till 31/5/1965 and thereafter, another notification was issued bearing No.SO.3978, dtd. 26/12/1966 granting exemption to every person of Coorg Race and every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg to possess a weapon without obtaining a licence.

5. The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner made a representation to the Government of India on 3/6/2014 and the same was not considered and therefore, another representation was submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, on 27/9/2014. The petitioner has thereafter, preferred a writ petition i.e., W.P.No.35878/2015 before this Court challenging the validity of the notification dtd. 6/7/1963 and the writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dtd. 30/9/2015 granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, for withdrawal of exemption notification and with a direction to the authority to consider the representation in accordance with law, within three months.

6. The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that he did submit a representation, keeping in view the order dtd. 30/9/2015 passed in W.P.No.35878/2015, however, as it was not considered a contempt petition was preferred i.e., CCC.No.622/2016 and finally, vide letter dtd. 27/6/2016, the petitioner's representation was rejected. The petitioner thereafter has again preferred a writ petition as a public interest litigation i.e., W.P.No.1386/2018 challenging the exemption granted to every person of Coorg Race and every Jamma tenure-holder in Coorg, dtd. 6/7/1963 and the subsequent notification dtd. 26/12/1966. This Court, by an order dtd. 13/8/2019 directed the Government of India to take appropriate decision for reviewing the notification dtd. 26/12/1966 within a period of eight weeks.

7. It is stated by the petitioner that the Government of India has thereafter, as directed by this Court, has issued the notification dtd. 29/10/2019 bearing No.S.O 3872(E) in exercise of the powers conferred under Sec. 41 of the Arms Act, 1959 granting exemption from obtaining a licence in respect of certain specified arms up to a period of 30/10/2029 i.e., for a period of 10 years from the date of the notification. The pet

                              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                              1
                              2
                              3
                              4
                              5
                              6
                              7
                              8
                              9
                              10
                              11
                              SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                              supreme today icon
                              logo-black

                              An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                              Please visit our Training & Support
                              Center or Contact Us for assistance

                              qr

                              Scan Me!

                              India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                              For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                              whatsapp-icon Back to top