9 Nov 2023 2:46 PM GMT
Senior Advocate S Nagamuthu, the amicus curiae in an ongoing suo motu case in the Supreme Court aimed at curbing the proliferation of unlicensed firearms, has suggested making bail provisions under the Arms Act, Explosives Act, and Explosive Substances Act more stringent, akin to those in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Notably, Nagamuthu has also recommended a reversal of the burden of proof. In other words, according to the senior counsel, the court should presume the guilt of the accused on proof of certain foundational facts, unless the contrary is proved by the accused.
In his latest written submissions, the amicus curiae has submitted a series of suggestions after careful consideration and consultation with experts in the field, to address India’s rising gun problem. He has insisted that this is an issue that requires the urgent attention of the union and state governments, urging them to collaboratively come up with innovative methods on a ‘war footing’ or risk the situation spiralling out of control.
First and foremost, Nagamuthu has suggested that the central government establishes a committee of experts comprising individuals with substantial experience and specialized knowledge, and tasked with studying inputs from various sources, including the state and union governments, other countries, and subject-matter experts in the field of science and technology, and formulating recommendations for curbing the ‘menace’ of illegal arms and ammunitions within a specific time frame, preferably one year.
Other than this, the amicus curiae has proposed referring the question of potential legislative changes to the law commission, to study the inadequacies in the existing laws and within six months, to recommend amending the existing laws, or making new laws to strengthen regulatory measures in respect of, the manufacture, sale, import, export, use, possession, and storage of arms and ammunition”. The commission, the senior advocate has said, may be requested to suggest making existing provisions relating to the procedure for investigation, and inquiry, more stringent, or suggest incorporating such provisions in the new law to be made. Nagamuthu further submits –
The amicus curiae’s suggestions even call for the Centre to conduct quarterly meetings of the chief secretaries and police chiefs in all states and union territories to survey the situation and study the peculiar conditions prevailing in each region, along with the difficulties experienced by the state agencies in curbing the proliferation and use of illegal arms and ammunitions.
Not only this, but the amicus curiae has also proposed various supplementary measures to address the issue. The supplementary suggestions put forth by him encompass multiple areas of concern and delve into potential changes in the existing laws – particularly in theprovisions relating to pre-arrest and post-arrest bail, expediting the trial, and presumption of innocence – and the establishment of special police units and courts for fast-tracking the investigations and the trials.
The amendments to the Arms Act, Explosives Act, 1884, and Explosives Substances Act, 1908 that have been recommended by the amicus curiae are –
Background
A bench led by retired judge KM Joseph in February took cognisance of the alarming issue of the widespread possession and use of unlicensed firearms in India, flagging the ‘disturbing’ trend during the hearing of a murder accused’s bail application. It also stressed that, unlike the United States which recognised the right to bear arms as a fundamental right, the Indian Constitution did not confer such a privilege.
Underscoring the importance of curbing the use of unlicensed firearms, the court sought the Uttar Pradesh government’s response on the number of cases related to the use and possession of unlicensed firearms, along with the steps taken to address the issue. In subsequent hearings, it continued to push for a robust response from not just the State of UP, but all states, union territories, and the union home ministry, seeking country-wide information on the steps taken to tackle the problem of unlicensed firearms. Besides suggesting improved implementation of the Arms Act, the court also indicated that legislative changes may be needed.
Case Details
Rajendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh | Miscellaneous Application No. 393 of 2023 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12831 of 2022