+
  • HOME»
  • Karnataka High Court: Election officials have no authority to seize and to search material before the announcement of election

Karnataka High Court: Election officials have no authority to seize and to search material before the announcement of election

The Karnataka High Court in the case Isthiyak Ahmed And Election Commission of India & Others observed and has made it clear that the Returning Officer or the election officials would not get any jurisdiction to search or to seize any material which being before the commencement of elections. The single judge bench headed by […]

The Karnataka High Court in the case Isthiyak Ahmed And Election Commission of India & Others observed and has made it clear that the Returning Officer or the election officials would not get any jurisdiction to search or to seize any material which being before the commencement of elections.
The single judge bench headed by Justice M Nagaprasanna in the case observed that the Returning Officer or the election officials would not get any jurisdiction to search or seize any material before the announcement of elections. Thus, because they are being appointed as the Officers for conduct of elections, the said power cannot be used before the declaration of elections and after the declaration of elections, the entire domain needs to be open but not till then.
In the present case, the court was hearing the plea moved by one Isthiyak Ahmed, wherein he claimed to be a social worker involved in charitable activities like distribution of food and clothes to the needy in Shivajinagar, the area of Bengaluru.
However, the Returning officer along with the police had visited the premises of the petitioner on March 19 and had found 530 bags of rice weighing 25 Kgs each. Thus, the court then issued a notice him, to which he submitted the reply. Moreover, the rice bags were not returned to him, aggrieved with the same he approached the court seeking release of the bags.
It has been contended before the court by the Ahmed that he has been distributing rice and clothes to all the needy people on all festivals of the year like Ugadi, Ramzan, Dussehra, Christmas etc.. Therefore, the respondents could not have seized the rice as they had no jurisdiction to do so and also to seek release of the entire materials seized.
In the case, the counsel appearing for the Central Government defend the action wherein stating that the petitioner intended to distribute rice for the purpose of gaining votes in the election. Therefore, it has also been admitted by the court that the election was yet to be announced and the respondents in the case had no authority to seize and search the material in question before the commencement of elections.
Further, the election of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly were declared on March 29, 2023 and the search took place on March 19, 2023.
It has also been observed by the High Court that the seizure is to be exercised by the authority or officers as stated under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, under normal circumstances and the Returning Officer and the Inspector of Police, who in the case has conducted the search and were not vested with such authority and their action is therefore be termed by the court as illegal.
The court in the case observed and has directed the petitioner to indemnify the stock by filing an affidavit.
Further, the court in the case directed to release of the seized rice bags, wherein the court directed that Ahmed shall not use the seized rice for distribution to anybody in the locality or even elsewhere. Ahmed shall also intimate the place for storage of rice to the police.

Tags:

Advertisement