Restricted firearms import on transfer of residence remains subject to the export-import policy and licensing requirements.

Import of restricted firearms on transfer of residence remained subject to the governing export-import regime, not merely the baggage rules or firearms law. The Customs Act and Baggage Rules provided for bona fide baggage clearance but did not override import restrictions imposed under the Foreign Trade law and the Exim Policy, which treated firearms as restricted goods and allowed import only against a specified licence. Circulars referring to one firearm for residence transfer did not displace that restriction. The challenge to detention and refusal to release the firearms therefore failed, and import beyond the permitted limit was not allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant, on transfer of residence, was entitled to import more than one licensed firearm into India notwithstanding the restriction under the export-import policy and the baggage rules.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Arms Act, 1959 and the Arms Rules, 1962 recognises possession and import of arms only within the limits of the governing law. Section 79 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 7 of the Baggage Rules, 1998 deal with duty-free clearance of articles in bona fide baggage, but they do not confer an unfettered right to import articles whose import is otherwise restricted. Under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, the Central Government is empowered to regulate imports, and the Exim Policy 1997-2002 treated firearms as restricted goods, permitting import only against a licence in the limited category specified therein. The Court also noted that the circulars permitting one firearm to persons transferring residence did not assist in overriding the applicable import restriction, and it declined to examine their interaction with the policy because that issue was not raised.

Conclusion: The appellant had no right to import the detained firearms beyond the extent permitted by the applicable import regime, and the challenge to the detention and refusal to release the firearms failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed because the import restriction under the export-import regime prevailed over the appellant's reliance on transfer of residence and the firearms law.

Ratio Decidendi: A person transferring residence cannot claim import of restricted firearms as of right under the baggage or firearms laws when the governing export-import policy permits such import only subject to a specific licence.

---