The Karnataka High Court has held that if the licensee is aged more than 70 years or has been holding a firearm licence for more than 25 years, he can nominate any of his legal heirs for the transfer of the licence, and there is no requirement for the transferee to establish that there is any threat to life.

The High Court was considering a petition where the petitioner sought the issuance of a direction to quash the impugned Endorsement issued by the Commissioner of Police.

The Single Bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj held, “I answer the point raised by holding that when an application under Rule 25 of the Arms Rules, 2016 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 licence for more than 25 years, he can nominate any of his legal heirs for transfer of licence and transfer of arm and there will be no requirement for the transferee to establish that there is any threat to life.”

Advocate Leelesh Krishna represented the Petitioner, while Additional Government Advocate K.P. Yashodha represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The petitioner is a Commander/Pilot in profession, and his father owned a valid arms licence for .32 calibre revolver. Desiring to give the said revolver to the petitioner, the petitioner applied for a grant of arms licence in terms of Rule 25 of the Arms Rules, 2016. Initially, the said application was rejected on the ground that there was no life threat to the petitioner. An endorsement was issued stating that the arms licence could not be issued to the petitioner since there was no life threat established by the petitioner. It was in such circumstances that the petitioner approached the High Court.

Reasoning

Referring to Rule 25 of the Arms Rule, 2016, the Bench explained that as per Clause (a), the licensing authority may grant a licence after the death of the licensee to his legal heir. “It is very clear that on the death of the licensee, the legal heir would be entitled to transfer the licence”, it noted.

The Bench explained that Clause (b) of Rule 25 (1) of the Arms Rule states that in any other case, when the licensee attains the age of 70 years or on holding the firearm for 25 years, whichever is earlier, the licensing authority may grant the licence to any legal heir nominated by him. “Thus under clause (b), the licensee is not dead, but has attained 70 years of age or has been holding the firearm for 25 years”, it added.

Considering that the petitioner's father is 75 years old and he has been holding a licence since 1971, which is for a period of almost 54 years, the Bench stated, “Thus, the dual conditions under Clause (b) of Rule 25 (1) of the Arms Rule being satisfied, what is only required under the proviso is that the other conditions are satisfied and there are no adverse remarks in the police report as regards the legal heir.”

As per the Bench, in terms of the second proviso of Rule 25 of the Arms Rule, the licensee would be subject to a limit of two firearms. It was also brought to the Court’s notice that the petitioner did not hold any other licence, and on the transfer of the licence, the petitioner would only be holding one licence. Considering that the conditions in terms of Clause (b) of Rule 25(1) of the Arms Rule were satisfied, the Bench held that the respondents could not have rejected the application on the ground that there was no threat to life established by the petitioner.

Allowing the Petition, the Bench issued a mandamus directing the Commissioner to process the application of the petitioner in terms of clause (b) of Rule 25(1) and issue a licence within a period of 4 weeks.

Cause Title: Michael Mahesh Chris Saldanha v. The State of Karnataka (Neutral Citation: 2025:KHC:45555)

Click here to read/download Order


Karnataka High CourtJustice Suraj Govindaraj

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.