Transfer of Arms License to Legal Heirs

Source: High Court of Karnataka

Why in News?

Justice Suraj Govindaraj of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Michael Mahesh Chris Saldanha v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2025) quashed the rejection of an arms license application and directed authorities to process the transfer under Rule 25 of the Arms Rules 2016, clarifying that no proof of life threat is required when transferring a firearm to a legal heir. 

What was the Background of Michael Mahesh Chris Saldanha v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2025) Case? 

• The petitioner, a 41-year-old Commander/Pilot, applied for an arms license under Rule 25 of the Arms Rules 2016. 
• His father, aged 75 years, owned a valid arms license for a .32 caliber revolver and had been holding the license since 1971 (approximately 54 years). 
• The father desired to transfer the revolver to the petitioner as his legal heir. 
• The application was initially rejected by the Commissioner of Police, Mangaluru on the ground that there was no life threat to the petitioner. 
• The petitioner filed an appeal, which was allowed and the rejection order was set aside. 
• Despite the appellate authority setting aside the rejection, the Commissioner of Police issued an endorsement dated 24.07.2025 refusing to grant the license, again citing the absence of established life threat. 
• The petitioner approached the Karnataka High Court through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 
• The petitioner sought quashing of the impugned endorsement and a direction to grant the arms license. 
• The petitioner did not hold any other arms license at the time of application.

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court held that when an application under Rule 25 is made during the lifetime of the licensee, so long as the licensee is aged more than 70 years or has been holding the firearm license for more than 25 years, there is no requirement for the transferee to establish threat to life. 
• The rejection based solely on absence of life threat was found to be contrary to Rule 25 of the Arms Rules 2016. 
• The Court emphasized that the application was not for a fresh arms license based on self-protection grounds, but rather for transfer under the specific provisions of Rule 25. 
• The respondent authorities had misunderstood the legal framework by applying the life threat criterion, which is relevant for fresh license applications but not for transfers under Rule 25. 

Court's Directions: 

The Karnataka High Court: 

• Allowed the writ petition. 
• Issued a writ of certiorari quashing the endorsement dated 24.07.2025 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Mangaluru. 
• Issued a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Police to:  
  • Process the petitioner's application in terms of Clause (b) of Rule 25(1) of the Arms Rules 2016 
  • Issue the license within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the court order.

What are the Arms Rules, 2016? 

Introduction: 

• The Arms Rules, 2016 were notified by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 44 of the Arms Act, 1959. 

The Arms Act, 1959 

• This Act consolidates and amends the law relating to Arms and Ammunition. 
  • The main objective of this Act is to regulate and restrict the circulation of arms and ammunition, which were illegal. 
  • This Act recognized the necessity for certain law-abiding citizens to possess and use firearms for certain specific purposes including self-defence. 
  • It came into force on 1st October 1962. 
• These rules came into force on 14th July 2016, replacing the Arms Rules, 1962, which had governed firearms licensing for over five decades. 
• The Arms Rules 2016 were framed to streamline and modernize the licensing regime for acquisition, possession, and carrying of firearms in India. 
• The rules provide detailed procedural guidelines for various aspects including license applications, renewals, transfers, record-keeping, and compliance requirements. 
• The 2016 Rules introduced several reforms aimed at: 
  • Simplifying procedures for law-abiding citizens seeking arms licenses. 
  • Digitization of licensing processes. 
  • Reducing discretion of licensing authorities through clearer guidelines. 
  • Strengthening security measures and background verification processes. 
  • Facilitating inheritance and transfer of firearms within families. 

Licenses under this Rule: 

The rules cover various categories of licenses including: 

• License for acquisition and possession of firearms. 
• License for carrying firearms. 
• License for sale and manufacture of arms and ammunition. 
• Special provisions for sportspersons, government officials, and others.

Rule 25 of Arms Rules 2016: 

Rule 25 of the Arms Rules 2016 deals with the grant of licenses to legal heirs and provides a mechanism for transfer of firearms within families. 

Provisions for Transfer: 

Sub-rule (1) - Two Scenarios: 

• (a) After death: The licensing authority may grant a license to the legal heir after the death of the licensee. 
• (b) During lifetime: In any other case, when the licensee attains 70 years of age or has been holding the firearm for 25 years, whichever is earlier, to any legal heir nominated by him. 

Conditions for Grant: 

The proviso to Sub-rule (1) states that notwithstanding Rule 12, the licensing authority may grant a license to the legal heir if: 

• The eligibility conditions under the Arms Act and Rules are fulfilled by the legal heir. 
• There are no adverse remarks in the police report regarding the legal heir. 

Multiple Legal Heirs: 

Sub-rule (2) provides the procedure when there are multiple legal heirs: 

• One legal heir nominated by all others may apply. 
• Must provide: (i) no-objection declaration from other heirs, (ii) indemnity bond with full license details, and (iii) death certificate of deceased licensee. 

Disposal of Arms: 

• Sub-rule (3) allows legal heirs to apply for limited period permission to sell the arms to a licensed dealer or entitled person if they decide not to retain the firearms.