Lawyers should possess only legal authorities and not weaponry, and the licensing authority has discretion to refuse licenses based on the grounds specified in the Arms Act.

Question raised:

1. Whether a Lawyer who has to hold law books can be allowed to hold a Revolver for his protection and whether the licensing authority's power to refuse a licence in his favour was justified? are the questions to be decided in this writ petition.

2. Before proceeding with the issue on hand, it is necessary to recapitulate the role of a member of the Bar in the society as set out by the Supreme Court in O.P. Sharma v. High Court of Punjab and Haryana reported in(2011) 6 SCC 86. In paragraphs 17 and 20, the Supreme Court had observed as follows:

Present state of the Bar:

"17.) The role and status of lawyers at the beginning of sovereign and democratic India is accounted as extremely vital in deciding that the nation's administration was to be governed by the rule of law. They were considered intellectuals amongst the elites of the country and social activists amongst the downtrodden. These include the names of a galaxy of lawyers like Mahatma Gandhi, Motilal Nehru, Jawaharlal Nehru, Bhulabhai Desai, C. Rajagopalachari, Dr. Rajendra Prasad and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, to name a few. The role of lawyers in the framing of the Constitution needs no special mention. In a profession with such a vivid history it is regretful, to say the least, to witness instances of the nature of the present kind. Lawyers are the officers of the court in the administration of justice.

20.) In R.D. Saxena v. BalramPrasad Sharma [(2000) 7 SCC 264] this Court held as under: (SCC p. 281, para 42)

“42.) In our country, admittedly, a social duty is cast upon the legal profession to show the people beckon (sic beacon) light by their conduct and actions. The poor, uneducated and exploited mass of the people need a helping hand from the legal profession, admittedly, acknowledged as a most respectable profession....."

(Emphasis added)

Case on hand:

3. The petitioner, who is 32 years old and a resident of Puducherry as well as a member of the Puducherry Bar, has come forward with the present writ petition seeking to challenge an order passed by the District Magistrate, Puducherry, i.e., the first respondent, dated 24.11.2011 in rejecting his request for possession of Arms License.

4. By the impugned order, the petitioner was informed that he had claimed that he was dealing in civil cases concerning land grabbing and there is every likelihood of threat to his life. Therefore, he sought for an Arms license. But the petitioner never disclosed as to from whom he was facing threat. He had also not given any complaint in this regard to any one. It was also brought to the notice that the second respondent and the Superintendent of Police (North) had informed that there was no history of any threat being received and also the details of any land grabbing case conducted by him. It was in that view of the matter, the first respondent had informed that there was no need for issuing any Arms License to the petitioner for his self protection.

5. He had filed his application under Rule 51 of the Arms Rules on 25.4.2011 along with a letter about the threat to his life. The application was forwarded to the second respondent. Since the second respondent was making illegal demands, the petitioner made a complaint to the Chief Secretary, Government of Puducherry and the Special Secretary, Revenue Department about the activities of the second respondent. The second respondent on being infuriated by the complaint informed the first respondent that the petitioner was not posed with any threat and that he had not produced any complaint in this regard. It was his case that instead of waiting for the threat to his life become a reality, the respondents should take into account all surrounding circumstances and must decide the application made by him.

What the Law says:

6. As the claim arose under the Arms Act, it is necessary to refer to certain crucial provisions, i.e., sections 13,14 and 18 of the Act and they are extracted below:

"13.) Grant of licences.—(1