Election Officials Have No Authority To Search And Seize Material Before Announcement Of Election: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that Returning Officer or the election officials would not get any jurisdiction to search or seize any material before announcement of elections.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed,

“The Returning Officer or the election officials would not get any jurisdiction to search or seize any material before the announcement of elections. Merely because they are appointed as Officers for conduct of elections, they cannot use the said power before the declaration of elections. After the declaration of elections, the entire domain would be open, but not till then.”

The court made the observation while allowing a petition filed by Isthiyak Ahmed, claiming to be a social worker involved in charitable activities like distribution of food and clothes to the needy in Shivajinagar area of Bengaluru.

The Returning officer along with the police had visited the petitioner's premise on March 19 and had found 530 bags of rice weighing 25 Kgs each. Then a notice was issued to him, to which he submitted a reply. However, the rice bags were not returned to him, thus he approached the court seeking release of the bags.

Ahmed contended that he has been distributing rice and clothes on all festivals of the year like Ugadi, Ramzan, Dussehra, Christmas etc. to all the needy. The respondents could not have seized the rice as they had no jurisdiction to do so and sought release of the entire materials seized.

Central government counsel defended the action stating that the petitioner intended to distribute rice for the purpose of gaining votes in the election. However, it was admitted that the election was yet to be announced and the respondents had no authority to search and seize the material in question before commencement of elections.

Elections to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly were declared on March 29; the search took place on March 19.

It is in this backdrop that the High Court observed “Seizure is to be exercised by the authority/officers under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, under normal circumstances. The Returning Officer and the Inspector of Police, who have conducted the search in the case at hand were not vested with such authority and their action is therefore, illegal.”

Noting that the elections are now declared, the court directed the petitioner to indemnify the stock by filing an affidavit. Accordingly, an affidavit was filed stating that “He would not violate the Code of Conduct, if the rice seized is released in his favour and he also declares that he will not violate any of the conditions imposed for release of rice bags.”

Accordingly, the court directed release of the seized rice bags, directing that Ahmed shall not use the seized rice for distribution to anybody in the locality or even elsewhere. He shall intimate the place of storage of rice to the police.

It clarified “In the event the petitioner is found indulging in distribution of rice that is now released in his favour, the election authorities are at liberty to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law.”

Case Title: Isthiyak Ahmed And Election Commission of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 6865 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 145

Date of Order: 31-03-2023

Appearance: Advocate Syed Ummer for petitioner.

CGC S R Dodawad for respondent 1.