Licence for acquisition and possession of firearms and ammunition
Section 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 deals with licence for acquisition and possession of firearms and ammunition. ] No person shall acquire, have in his possession, or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds in this behalf a licence issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder: Provided that a person may, without himself holding a licence, carry any firearm or ammun The Act came into force on 01 Oct 1962.
1[(1)] No person shall acquire, have in his possession, or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds in this behalf a licence issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder:
Provided that a person may, without himself holding a licence, carry any firearm or ammunition in the presence, or under the written authority, of the holder of the licence for repair or for renewal of the licence or for use by such holder.
2[(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no person, other than a person referred to in sub-section (3), shall acquire, have in his possession or carry, at any time, more than 3[two firearm]:
Provided that a person who has in his possession more firearms than three at the commencement of the Arms (Amendment) Act, 1983 (25 of 1983), may retain with him any three of such firearms and shall deposit, within ninety days from such commencement, the remaining firearms with the officer in charge of the nearest police station or, subject to the conditions prescribed for the purposes of sub-section (1) of section 21, with a licensed dealer or, where such person is a member of the armed forces of the Union, in a unit armoury referred to in that sub-section.
4[Provided that a person who has in his possession more firearms than two at the commencement of the Arms (Amendment) Act, 2019, may retain with him any two of such firearm and shall deposit, within one year from such commencement, the remaining firearm with the officer in charge of the nearest police station or, subject to the conditions prescribed for the purposes of sub-section (1) of section 21, with a licensed dealer or, where such person is a member of the armed forces of the Union, in a unit armoury referred to in that sub-section after which it shall be delicensed within ninety days from the date of expiry of aforesaid one year:
Provided further that while granting arms licence on inheritance or heirloom basis, the limit of two firearms shall not be exceeded.]
(3) Nothing contained in sub-section (2) shall apply to any dealer in firearms or to any member of a rifle club or rifle association licensed or recognised by the Central Government using a point 22 bore rifle or an air rifle for target practice.
(4) The provisions of sub-sections (2) to (6) (both inclusive) of section 21 shall apply in relation to any deposit of firearms under the proviso to sub-section (2) as they apply in relation to the deposit of any arm or ammunition under sub-section (1) of that section.]
Section 3, The Arms Act, 1959 (Act 54 of 1959).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Referred to by 8
- s. 5 Licence for manufacture, sale, etc., of arms and ammunition
- s. 13 Grant of licences
- s. 14 Refusal of licences
- s. 15 Duration and renewal of licence
- s. 25 Punishment for certain offences
- s. 26 Secret contraventions
- s. 39 Previous sanction of the district magistrate necessary in certain cases
- s. 44 Power to make rules
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Rajni vs State of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When documentary evidence in the form of school certificate and birth certificate from municipal authority showing date of birth is available, the Juvenile Justice Board cannot order medical examination for age determination. The hierarchy prescribed under Section 94(2) of Juvenile Justice Act 2015 must be strictly followed: school/matriculation certificate first, then birth certificate from corporation/municipality/panchayat, and only in absence of these can medical examination be ordered. The date of birth mentioned in school certificate is determinative of age and cannot be ignored. Further, the Juvenile Justice Board has no power of review under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015 to revisit its earlier acceptance of a date of birth in a previous proceeding. Additionally, when a juvenile accused of heinous offence has been on bail for more than three years without evidence of misuse, interference with bail order is not warranted unless there is evidence of misuse of liberty.
On this section: Illegal possession and use of firearms; separate criminal charges against accused
-
The State Rep. by Inspector of Police Q Branch Cid Thoothukudi vs Mariya Anton Vijay
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash FIR/charge sheet should be exercised very sparingly and only in the rarest of rare cases where the allegations do not prima facie constitute any offence, or are absurd and inherently improbable, or where there is an express legal bar to proceedings. At the charge sheet stage, the High Court cannot appreciate factual materials and draw inferences as if deciding an appellate case. The High Court must confine itself to examining whether prima facie case is made out without going into reliability or genuineness of allegations. Factual questions regarding possession of arms, their nature, authorization, and whether they form part of ordinary armament of vessel under Section 45(a) of Arms Act can only be decided through full trial on merits with evidence from both parties, not at the threshold stage of charge sheet examination. The burden of proving exemption under Section 45(a) lies on the accused person, and such exemption applies only to arms forming part of ordinary armament or equipment of the vessel, not to all arms carried on the vessel.
On this section: Sections 25(1B)(a) and (f) relate to possession of prohibited arms and ammunition without authorization. Section 45(a) provides exemption for arms forming part of ordinary armament or equipment of sea-going vessels. The Court interpreted Section 45(a) to require accused to prove that seized arms formed part of ordinary armament, and held that mere possession of unlicensed arms is sufficient to attract Arms Act provisions.
-
State of Rajasthan vs Ram Kailash @ Ram Vilas
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The doctrine of transfer of malice under Section 301 IPC applies to firearm cases: when an accused shoots at a person on a motorcycle with the intention to cause bodily injury likely to cause death, the absence of knowledge about the victim's exact identity does not negate the intention to cause death required for a murder conviction under Section 300 IPC. The malice attaches to the act of shooting with knowledge of its imminently dangerous nature, not to a specific person. Therefore, if the shooter acts with intention to cause bodily injury as likely to cause death, and death is in fact caused, the conviction must be under Section 302 IPC (murder) rather than Section 304 Part-I IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
On this section: Unauthorized possession of firearm - Applied to convict the respondent for illegal possession of the desi pistol used in the crime
-
Manoj vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An offence under Section 324 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means) remains compoundable with the permission of the Court under Section 320(2) Cr.P.C. as long as the Cr.P.C. (Amendment) Act 2005 has not been brought into force. Upon valid and voluntary compounding of such an offence by the person to whom hurt is caused, based on sufficient and genuine grounds including reconciliation and family relations, the Court is empowered to set aside the conviction and sentence, thereby allowing rehabilitation of the offenders within the community.
On this section: Relates to use of unlicensed firearms - conviction acquitted by High Court
-
Shilpa Sonu Singh vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where an accused woman has undergone substantial incarceration (approximately two years) pending trial on serious charges, and considering her gender as a recognized factor in bail jurisprudence, bail may be granted on humanitarian grounds even when the High Court has previously rejected the bail application, without detailed examination of the charge's gravity or the evidence's strength.
On this section: Charges related to illegal possession/use of firearms
-
Renjith K.S. v. State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Arms Act s.21 permits deposit of arms whose possession has ceased to be lawful either with the officer in charge of the nearest police station or, subject to prescribed conditions (Arms Rules 2016 r.47 Form VIII dealer), with a licensed dealer; cancellation of licence solely for deposit with a Form VIII armoury rather than the SHO, without hearing, is unsustainable.
On this section: s.3 licence for acquisition/possession — post-2019 two-firearm limit under s.3(2); excess arm deposit via s.21/Rule 47 licensed dealer; cancellation without hearing set aside.
-
Dr. Padamsinha B. Patil vs Central Bureau of Investigation
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the right of an accused to examine defence witnesses is fundamental and ordinarily cannot be curtailed, the court has discretion under Section 233(3) of the CrPC to refuse such applications if made for vexation, delay, or defeating ends of justice. However, this discretion must be exercised judicially. The court cannot reject defence witnesses merely on grounds of delay when the prosecution has taken years to examine its witnesses. Critically, if the prosecution does not examine witnesses whose statements were recorded during investigation under Section 161 of the CrPC, and the defence alleges these witnesses were deliberately withheld, the accused cannot be deprived of the opportunity to examine them in defence, provided such witnesses have potential to throw light on the occurrence. The relevancy of evidence must be determined by whether it bears on the facts in issue or relevant facts under Section 5 of the Indian Evidence Act, not by whether it relates to the character or background of the deceased.
On this section: Charges related to illegal possession and use of arms in commission of murder.
-
State vs Nirbhay Sings
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When eyewitness testimony is credible, consistent, and corroborated by circumstantial evidence such as forensic findings, post-mortem examination, and recovery of weapons, it is sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a murder case. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the court must carefully evaluate the credibility of eyewitnesses by examining their consistency, corroboration with other evidence, and absence of material contradictions. The alibi defense must be proven by the accused on the balance of probabilities, and if the defense witnesses are not credible, the alibi defense fails.
On this section: Punishment for possession of illegal firearms - applied to convict Anurag Singh and Shivam Singh for possessing unlicensed firearms
-
Udailal and Anr. vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the conviction of appellants for criminal conspiracy, attempted murder, and illegal firearms possession is legally sustainable and properly established by reliable evidence, the sentences imposed by the trial court can be reduced to the period already undergone by the appellants when the appellants have already served more than six years and three months of imprisonment out of the maximum ten-year sentence, provided that the appellants pay the fine amounts imposed as compensation to the injured victims. The principles of rehabilitation, proportionality in sentencing, and the substantial time already served in custody justify such reduction, thereby meeting the ends of justice.
On this section: Illegal possession and use of firearms - Applied to the use of country-made pistol by Udailal
-
Mrs.a.dhanalakshmi vs The Superintendent of Prisons
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a convict is serving multiple sentences under different warrants, each warrant must be returned to the concerned court immediately upon expiry of the sentence term to which it relates, unless an order under Section 356 Cr.P.C. has been passed. The concurrent running of sentences does not exempt the prison authority from this mandatory obligation under Rule 624 of Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983. The return of the warrant is a procedural and administrative requirement and does not automatically confer rights to remission or commutation.
On this section: Applied to the conviction for illegal weapons possession resulting in three years rigorous imprisonment in C.C.No.328 of 2005.
-
Vidhayaram vs State of Rajasthan through P P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the prosecution fails to effect any recovery from the accused and the complainant cannot identify the accused in an identification parade, the High Court may grant regular bail under Section 439 CrPC, as the weakness of the prosecution's evidence at the bail stage justifies release pending trial.
On this section: Illegal possession of arms; one of the charges against the petitioner
-
Jagdeep @ Dhankhar vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When material witnesses fail to support the prosecution case during trial and co-accused have been granted bail by a coordinate bench, bail may be granted to an accused charged with serious offences, particularly after prolonged custody, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
On this section: Charge of illegal possession or use of arms against the petitioner; second primary offence for which bail was sought
-
Sahazad vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused is offered legal aid and refuses it, stating he will engage his own counsel, and subsequently a counsel appears on his behalf and argues the case, with the accused raising no objection and the counsel's representation being evidenced through documents like transfer applications bearing the counsel's signature, the requirement of Section 304 CrPC is satisfied, and the charge framing order cannot be deemed illegal on the ground of denial of legal representation. The formal filing of Vakalatnama is not essential to establish counsel representation in criminal proceedings.
On this section: Charge related to illegal possession or use of arms framed against the accused
-
Ramesh vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused has been in prolonged custody, co-accused in the same case have been granted bail, and key witness testimony does not support the prosecution narrative, bail should be granted under Section 439 CrPC as a matter of justice and expediency, without prejudice to the merits of the case.
On this section: Provisions relating to illegal possession and use of firearms. The petitioner was charged under these sections for allegedly providing the firearm used in the crime.
-
Vakil vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a bail application has been rejected by the High Court on the ground of involvement in multiple criminal cases, a subsequent bail application will not be entertained unless there is a material change in circumstances that distinguishes the case from the earlier rejection.
On this section: Provisions relating to illegal possession and use of arms; charges against the petitioner
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… On the CBI taking over investigation, the case was re-registered as RC 5 (S)/90-SIU.V on 21.04.1990 under Sections 302, 341 and 364 RPC read with Section 3 of the TADA Act and Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act. 2.3 Investigation revealed that Hilal Beg was the self-styled Chief Commander of a banned militant organization called Jammu & Kashmir Students Liberation Front (JKSLF). He along with other members of JKSLF, including accused Javed Shala, Tahir Ahmed Mir, Mushtaq Ahmed Sheikh, Mushtaq …
Made under this section, and citing it
4 instruments state that it was made under this provision — the power to make it comes from here, so a change to any of them changes what this section requires in practice. Newest first.
- S.O. 1501(E) dated 02/04/2019 on amendment to S.O. 6203 (E) dated 14/12/2018Notification 2019
- S.O. 5607(E) dated 01/11/2018 on Delegation of powers of import and export of Small Arms.Notification 2018
- S.O. 6203(E) dated 14/12/2018, Supersession of notification S.O 1636 (E) dated 19.05.17 on Delegation of power on Deptt. of Industrial Policy and PromotionNotification 2018
- Empowering CAPFs Officers and SOs under Arms ActNotification 2010
Another 13 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
- Arms(Amendment) Rules 2020 GSR 108(E)Rule 2020
- Arms(Amendment) Rules 2020 GSR 11(E)Rule 2020
- Arms(Amendment) Rules 2020 GSR 625(E)Rule 2020
- Notification No. S.O. 3872(E) dated 29.10.2019Notification 2019
- Notification No. S.O. 665(E) dated 12.02.2019Notification 2019
- G.S.R. 1079(E) dated 01/11/2018 on Amendment of Form X pertaining to export of firearmsNotification 2018
- G.S.R. 644(E) dated 12/07/2018 on effective of NDAL-UINNotification 2018
- G.S.R. 741(E) dated 03/08/2018 corrigendum to G.S.R. 644(E) dated 12/07/2018Notification 2018
- Exemption in licence feesNotification 2017
- G.S.R. 1342(E) dated 27/10/2017 on Amendment in Fee Structure, setting up of multi unit facility, lifetime validity of licence issued in Form VII to manufacturers etc.Notification 2017
- S.O. 1988(E) dated 04/08/2014 on exemption of sport personsNotification 2014
- S.O. 1988(E). dated 4th August, 2014 on Arms Licences to Sport personsNotification 2014
- Arms Rules, 1962Rule 1962
Questions about Section 3
What have the courts held on Section 3 of the Arms Act?
Rajni vs State of Uttar Pradesh (23 May 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Illegal possession and use of firearms; separate criminal charges against accused. Another 14 judgments on this section are set out below, 5 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 3 of the Arms Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Arms Act 3, section 3 Arms Act, section 3 of the Arms Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 15 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Rajni vs State of Uttar Pradesh (23 May 2025).
What should I read with Section 3 of the Arms Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 21 (Deposit of arms, etc., on possession ceasing to be lawful), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 8 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. The rules and notifications made under it are where it actually bites, and there are 4: most recently S.O. 1501(E) dated 02/04/2019 on amendment to S.O. 6203 (E) dated 14/12/2018 (2019), then S.O. 5607(E) dated 01/11/2018 on Delegation of powers of import and export of Small Arms. (2018), and 2 more.
When did Section 3 of the Arms Act come into force?
Section 3 of the Arms Act, cited as Arms Act 3, came into force on 01 Oct 1962, having been enacted on 23 Dec 1959. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 25. Punishment for certain offences1755 words
- 2. Definitions and interpretation734 words
- 44. Power to make rules681 words
- 24A. Prohibition as to possession of notified arms in disturbed areas, etc618 words
- 17. Variation, suspension and revocation of licences579 words
- 24B. Prohibition as to carrying of notified arms in or through public places in disturbed areas etc560 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.