This Court has ruled that: "We do not agree with the contention of the Solicitor General that since a paltik is a homemade gun, is illegally manufactured as recognized in People vs. Fajardo, and cannot be issued a license or permit, it is no longer necessary to prove that it is unlicensed. This appears to be at first blush, a very logical proposition. We cannot, however, yield to it because fajardo did not say that paltiks can in no case be issued a license or permit and that proof that a firearm is a paltiks dispenses with proof that it is unlicensed. [G.R. No. 110569. December 9, 1996]
