City
Epaper

Coorg arms licence exemption questioned, SC seeks Centre's response

By IANS | Updated: March 29, 2022 20:45 IST

New Delhi, March 29 The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the Central government and others' response on a ...

Open in App

New Delhi, March 29 The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the Central government and others' response on a plea challenging a notification, which permitted exemption to Jumma tenure holders and Kodava community from obtaining a licence to carry and possess firearms, under the Arms Act.

A plea had been filed by Capt Chetan Y.K. challenged the Karnataka High Court judgment upholding the validity of the exemption notification issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs on October 29, 2019. The notification read: "The arms or ammunition carried or possessed by any person being Coorg by race and every Jumma tenure holder in Coorg and herein exempted whilst residing or travelling outside the district of Coorg shall not exceed one rifle with 100 rounds of ammunition for the same and one smooth bore breech or muzzle loading gun with 500 cartridges or the equivalent in leaden shot and gunpowder."

A bench, headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana issued notice after hearing arguments.

The plea argued that the notification created discrimination based on caste and race and ancestral land tenure, which violated Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. The plea contended that the locals, who have the same culture, but neither belonged to the Coorg community nor did they possess now defunct Jumma tenure holding of land, have not been granted any exemption.

It contended that the notification was issued under Section 41 of the Arms Act and any exemption under this Act can only be granted in public interest, while emphasising that the notification also violated Section 41.

The high court observed that Kodava community and Jumma tenure holders are enjoying the benefit of exemption since the pre-independence period, and they have rightly been granted exemption for a period of ten years, and not for an indefinite term.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Tags: Central GovernmentSupreme CourtSeveral supreme courtSupreme court and high court level
Open in App

Related Stories

NationalSupreme Court Issues Notice to Bihar and Delhi Governments Over Minor Girl's Plea Against Forced Child Marriage

NationalThane-Ghodbunder Tunnel: Supreme Court Accepts Maharashtra Govt's Decision to Scrap Rs 14,000 Crore Bid, Big Relief to L&T

NationalCryptocurrency Needs To Be Regulated, Banning Not an Option, Says Supreme Court

MaharashtraPune Porsche Crash: One Year On, 9 Accused Still Behind Bars; Justice Still in Motion

National8th Pay Commission: Employee Unions Demand 2.86 Fitment Factor; Will Salaries See a Real Hike This Time?

National Realted Stories

NationalPM Modi made it absolutely clear, no third-party mediation on PoK: Manjinder Sirsa

NationalDMK student wing protests against Centre's stand on Keeladi excavation report

NationalAishwarya Raj, Wife of BJP MLA, Wins Mrs Bihar 2025 Title

NationalHindi will not be allowed to be imposed in Maharashtra: Raj Thackeray

NationalIndia’s strong fiscal dynamics to propel growth, curb inflation: Report