Election officials have no jurisdiction to conduct search and seizure before announcement of election: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently held that election officials do not possess the power to undertake search and seizure operations prior to the announcement of elections [Ishtiyak Ahmed vs Election Commission of India]..Justice M Nagaprasanna emphasized that merely because they are appointed as officers for conduct of elections, they cannot use the power before elections are declared. "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," the Court said..The Court was hearing a petition by one Ishtiyak Ahmed seeking a direction to release 530 bags of rice seized from him by election officials. .The petitioner claimed to be a well-known social worker who actively engages in charitable activities such as food distribution. He claimed that on March 19, 2023, the Returning Officer, accompanied by a Police Inspector, seized 530 bags of rice from him. Despite the petitioner submitting his justification in response to the notice issued to him the following day, the rice bags were not returned to him..Advocate Syed Ummer for the petitioner claimed that he had been distributing rice to ones in need on all festivals of the year for the past fifteen years. He argued that the officials could not have seized the bags as they had no jurisdiction to do so, and sought a direction for their release..On the other hand, Central Government Counsel SR Dodawad for the Election Commission (EC) justified the actions of the officials on the ground that the petitioner had hoarded the bags for distributing them to gain votes in the Karnataka Assembly election..He admitted that the election date was yet to be announced and that the officials had no authority to search and seize before commencement of election..The Court noted that when the seizure was made, the election had not been notified. It further noted that the petitioner had placed on record all documents after being issued notice, but was denied his rice bags..The Court stressed that after declaration of elections, seizure can be exercised but under normal circumstances, it can be exercised only under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Since the officials were not vested with such authority, the Court held their act to be illegal..After the declaration of elections, the entire domain would be open, but not until then. Seizure is to be exercised by the authority/officers under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, under normai circumstances. The Returning Officer and the Inspector of Police, who conducted the search in the case at hand were not vested with such authority and their action is therefore, illegal, the Court made it clear..However, even though the Court opined that the seizure was without jurisdiction, stood declared as on date. Hence, it directed the petitioner not to distribute the bags until the elections are over..[Read Order]