₹100-crore J&K gun license scam

₹100-Crore J&K Gun Licence Scam: Home Ministry Seeks Evidence of ‘Money Trail’ Linking IAS Officers to Arms Dealers

The420 Correspondent
5 Min Read

New Delhi: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) whether there is “concrete evidence” establishing a financial trail between eight IAS officers and gun dealers in the alleged ₹100-crore gun licence scam in Jammu and Kashmir.

In a letter to the CBI Director dated September 1, the MHA sought clarification on whether any “money trail” had been identified and if there was proof that district magistrates received a share of proceeds from the illegal sale of gun licences. The letter forms part of a status report the ministry submitted to the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on October 9.

FCRF Launches CCLP Program to Train India’s Next Generation of Cyber Law Practitioners

Over 2.74 Lakh Gun Licences Under Scrutiny

The CBI is investigating irregularities in the issuance of over 2.74 lakh gun licences between 2012 and 2016, a period when Jammu and Kashmir was still a state. According to agencies, licences were allegedly issued in exchange for monetary consideration, with several weapons granted illegally to personnel of the armed and paramilitary forces who were neither residents of J&K nor posted in the concerned districts. The estimated value of the scam is over ₹100 crore.

MHA Questions the CBI on Scope and Evidence

The MHA’s latest communication follows an August 27 meeting involving senior officials of the ministry, the CBI, and the J&K administration.
The eight IAS officers named by the CBI for prosecution sanction had served as District Magistrates in Kathua, Udhampur, Rajouri, Baramulla, Pulwama, Kargil, and Leh between 2012 and 2016.

Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, prior sanction from the competent authority—in this case, the MHA—is mandatory before prosecuting serving IAS officers.

In its communication, the ministry referred to allegations against two officers: one accused of “parking” ₹12–18 lakh in his mother’s bank account, and another alleged to have deposited ₹2.8 lakh in two women’s accounts during demonetisation, later transferring the money back to himself.

The ministry questioned the CBI

Is there an actual money trail linking any of the gun houses or arms dealers to these officers? Are there any financial transactions or dealings in movable or immovable property between them?

The MHA also sought details of the officers’ tenures in the respective districts and asked why the investigation was confined to the 2012–2016 period when some officers had held similar positions earlier.

During a recent hearing, Deputy Solicitor General Vishal Sharma and Central Government Standing Counsel Eishan Dadhichi requested an adjournment, citing that the ministry’s fresh affidavit had not yet been placed on record or cleared by the CBI.

The report was filed following the High Court’s August 8 directive, which gave the MHA six weeks to submit a “specific affidavit/status report” regarding its decision on the CBI’s request for sanction to prosecute the eight IAS officers.

Petitioners have argued that the CBI’s findings suggest collusion between the officers and gun dealers, calling it a matter of national security.

CBI Findings and Prosecution Status

According to the CBI, around 95% of the 2.74 lakh gun licences issued between 2012 and 2016 were granted to armed forces personnel who were not residents of Jammu and Kashmir.

Advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmad, representing the petitioners, claimed that at least nine IAS officers and over 15 Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service (KAS) officials were allegedly involved, along with court clerks, intermediaries, and gun dealers.

In March 2021, the J&K administration granted sanction to prosecute all KAS officers and judicial clerks implicated in the scam, leading to the filing of chargesheets against several middlemen and dealers. However, no such decision was taken regarding the IAS officers.

Ahmad noted that the MHA last year granted prosecution sanction for only one IAS officer, while the decision on the remaining seven is still pending.

Stay Connected