High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions disposed of; directions to adher...

W.P.(C).No.24926 of 2020 (M) and connected cases, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.24926 of 2020 (M)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P.V.ASHA
Judgment Date
2020-11-20
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petitions disposed of. The court holds that police cannot demand deposit of licenced arms; if a notice is issued under Ext.P1 based on a Screening Committee decision, the licence holder must deposit the arms within the period specified and obtain proper receipt. Screening Committee decisions are to be followed; the petitions are disposed accordingly.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed of; directions to adhere to Ext.P1 and to act on Screening Committee decisions regarding arms deposit; police cannot independently demand deposit of licensed arms.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Joy V.A.
  • Joseph N.M.
  • Benny K. Thomas
  • Lijo George
  • Johnson M.P.
  • Muraleedharan T.K.

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by the Chief Secretary
  • The Chief Electoral Officer (Kerala)
  • The Chief Election Commissioner of India
  • The District Collector, Ernakulam
  • The Superintendent of Police, Aluva Rural
  • The Station House Officer, Ramamangalam, Ernakulam
  • The Station House Officer, Muvattupuzha, Ernakulam
  • Additional R8: Kerala State Election Commission represented by its Secretary (substituted for second respondent)
  • (In connected cases: names include the District Magistrate, Ernakulam; the S.H.O Piravom; the S.H.O Kasaba Police Station; the District Collector Palakkad; the Superintendent of Police Palakkad)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Saji Kuriachchan
  • • M.R. Nandakumar

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Vinitha B. (Government Pleader)
  • • M. Murali Purushothaman (Senior Counsel)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioners (six individuals) approach this court contending that police officers in their respective localities are demanding that they deposit licensed firearms. They anchor their challenge on Ext.P1, Circular dated 01/09/2009, which enjoins a Screening Committee in every district/commissionerate to screen all licence holders, assess arms, and direct deposit where necessary, with penalties for non-compliance; the decision of the Screening Committee is to be followed by the licensing authority. The petitioners rely on earlier Kerala High Court decisions (Saji Kuriachan v. District Collector, Ernakulam and Others, 2011 (1) KHC 214, and Joseph v. District Collector, 2019 (1) KLT 1034) to argue that police cannot direct deposit of licensed arms and that only the Screening Committee, constituted under EC guidelines, can decide. The respondents contend that there is no material showing police action against petitioners and that Ext.P1 must be adhered to; a Screening Committee has been or will be constituted, and actions will follow its decision. The court finds the petitioners’ apprehension baseless since police cannot compel deposit; however, if a notice is issued under Ext.P1 based on Screening Committee findings, deposit must be effected within the period specified and with proper receipt. The petitions are disposed of in this light, directing compliance with Ext.P1 and Screening Committee decisions.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)Clause 3.11 of Ext.P1 Circular dated 01/09/2009 from the Election Commission

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that police officers have no authority to demand deposit of licensed firearms. Relying on Ext.P1 and earlier Kerala High Court judgments (Saji Kuriachan v. District Collector and Joseph v. District Collector), they contend that Screening Committees, not the police, must take such decisions under EC guidelines. They claim mere apprehension is not enough to warrant action, and that notices and deposit demands must flow only from the Screening Committee’s order.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that there is no material proving police-directed deposits; Ext.P1 Circular must be strictly followed, and Screening Committees have been or will be formed to take decisions as per EC guidelines. They assert notices will be issued in accordance with Ext.P1 and the law will be followed.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Saji Kuriachan v. District Collector, Ernakulam and Others2011 (1) KHC 214Mentioned OnlyCited by petitioners to support the claim that police cannot demand deposit; court did not expressly adopt or distinguish its holdings.
Joseph v. District Collector2019 (1) KLT 1034Mentioned OnlyCited by petitioners for the same principle; not explicitly treated or overruled in the judgment.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C).No.24926 of 2020 (M) and connected cases, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)** ## **PETITIONERS:** |**1**|**JOY V.A.**| |---|---| ||**AGED 59 YEARS**| ||**S/O.V.M.ABRAHAM, VAYAKARA HOUSE, KUNNACKAL P.O.,**| ||**MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM (DIST.), PIN- 682 316.**| |**2**|**JOSEPH N.M.**| ||**AGED 66 YEARS**| ||**S/O.CHERIA MATHAI, NELLIMATTATHIL HOUSE,**| ||**KUNNACKAL P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM (DIST.),**| ||**PIN - 682 316.**| |**3**|**BENNY K.THOMAS**| ||**AGED 55 YEARS**| ||**S/O.K.V.THOMAS, KAVUMPACKAL HOUSE, EAST KADATHY KARA,**| ||**VELLOORKUNNAM MARKET P.O., PIN - 686 661,**| ||**MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM (DIST.)**| |**4**|**LIJO GEORGE,**| ||**AGED 36 YEARS**| ||**S/O.T.C.GEORGE, THELAKKATT HOUSE, EZHAKKARANADU P.O.,**| ||**PUTHENCRUZ VIA., ERNAKULAM (DIST.), PIN - 682 308.**| |**5**|**JOHNSON M.P.**| ||**AGED 62 YEARS**| ||**S/O.M.V.PHILIP, MATTATHIL HOUSE, VALAKOM,**| ||**KUNNACKAL P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM (DIST.),**| ||**PIN - 682 316.**| |**6**|**MURALEEDHARAN T.K.**| ||**AGED 61 YEARS**| ||**S/O.T.K.KUMARAN, THEKKILAKKATTU HOUSE,**| ||**EAST KADATHY KARA, KUNNACKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM (DIST.),**| ||**PIN - 682 316.**| ||**BY ADVS.**| ||**SRI.SAJI KURIACHAN**| ||**SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR**| **RESPONDENTS:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695036.** **1** **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 2** - **2 * THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER VIKAS BHAVAN, LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 033.** - **3 THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, NIRVACHAN SADAN, ASOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 001.** - **4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM - 682 030.** - **5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALUVA RURAL- 683 101.** - **6 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER RAMAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM - 686 663.** - **7 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM - 686661.** - **8 ADDL.R8: THE KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NEAR LEGILSATURE COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA – 695 033.** - **(*ADDL.R8 IS IMPLEADED AND SUBSTITUTED IN PLACE OF SECOND RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 20.11.2020 IN I.A.NO.1/2020 IN W.P.(C).NO.24926/2020)** **R1,R4,R5,R6&R7 BY SMT.VINITHA.B, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R2 & R3 BY SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).25224/2020(C), WP(C).25569/2020(U), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** **connected cases 3** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.25224 OF 2020(C)** ## **PETITIONER:** **CHINSON CHERIAN AGED 43 YEARS** **S/O. K.M.CHERIAN, KOLLEENAL HOUSE, MANEED P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM (DIST), PIN-682 308** **BY ADVS.** **SRI.SAJI KURIACHAN SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 036** - **2 KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 033** - **3 THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, NIRVACHAN SADAN, ASOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001** - **4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM-682 030** - **5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA RURAL-683 101** - **6 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PIRAVOM, ERNAKULAM-686 664** **R1,R4,R5&R6 BY SMT.VINITHA.B,GOVERNMENT PLEADER, R2 & R3 BY SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,SC** **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 4** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).24926/2020(M), WP(C).25569/2020(U), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** **connected cases 5** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.25569 OF 2020(U)** ## **PETITIONER:** **THOMAS GEORGE AGED 61 YEARS S/O. E.D VARKEY (LATE) HOUSE NO. 11/434, HILL VIEW ENCLAVE, KALLEPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD (DIST), PIN - 678 005** **BY ADVS. SRI.SAJI KURIACHAN SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 036** **2 KEERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695 033 3 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, CIVIL STATION P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 001 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD, NURANI - 678 001 5 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASABA POLICE STATION, KAILAS NAGAR, PUDUSSERY WEST, PALAKKAD - 678 622** **R1,R3,R4&R5 BY SMT.VINITHA.B., GOVERNMENT PLEADER. R2 BY SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).24926/2020(M), WP(C).25224/2020(C), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** **connected cases 6** ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 20th day of November 2020** The complaint of the petitioners in all these three cases is that the Station House Officer of the respective locality of the petitioners are demanding them to deposit the firearms for which they have been granted licence. According to the petitioners, the respondents are bound to follow the parameters laid down in clause 3 .11 of Ext.P1 Circular. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, relying on the judgments of this Court in **Saji Kuriachan v. District Collector, Ernakulam and Others [2011 (1) KHC 214]** as well as **Joseph v. District Collector [2019 (1) KLT 1034]** argued that the police officials do not have any authority to direct the persons like petitioners to deposit the arms and it is for the Screening Committee to be constituted in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Election Commission to take a decision in the matter. **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 7** 3. The learned Government Pleader argued that petitioners have not produced any material to substantiate their contention that any of the police officers demanded them to deposit the licenced arms and it is only on the basis of a mere apprehension that the petitioners have approached this Court. According to the learned Government Pleader, the respondents would strictly abide by Ext.P1 Circular issued by the Election Commission on 1.9.2009. 4. Having heard Sri. Saji Kuriachan, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Smt. B.Vinitha, the learned Government Pleader, it is seen that as per Ext.P1 Circular, a Screening Committee has to be constituted immediately after the announcement of elections, by the District Magistrates for assessment of all licence holders in order to impound licenced arms, if it is found necessary and to get the same deposited with the District Authorities. Clause 3.11 of Ext P1 circular read as follows: _“3.11. As per the above-referred guidelines laid down by the Bombay High Court, for such review and assessment of all licence holders;_ ## **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 8** - _(a) There shall be a Screening Committee in every District and in every Commissionerate area. In the District, the Screening Committee shall consist of the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police. In the Commissionerate area, it shall consist of the Commissioner of Police (Admn.) and Joint/Additional Commissioner of the Police (Admn.)_ - _(b) The Screening Committee shall commence the work of screening from the day of announcement of election by the Election Commission and it shall complete the exercise of screening in respect of licences placed before it as far as possible before the date of issue of notification of elections._ - _(c) Cases of all licence holders as mentioned in para 3.10_ - _above shall be placed before the Screening Committee._ - _(d) On receipt of report from the Screening Committee, the licensing authority shall issue notice before the last date fixed for withdrawal of candidature to the individual licence holder for depositing his arms and inform the licence holder that failure to deposit the arms as directed would result in prosecution under Section 188 of the I.P.C. as stated in clause 3.11(g)._ - _(e) The licence holder thereafter shall deposit his arms forthwith and in any case within a period of seven_ ## **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 9** _days from the date of receipt of the notice. The Licensing Authority shall give proper receipt to the licence holder._ - _(f) The decision taken by the Screening Committee shall be final._ - _(g) Any licence holder who fails to deposit arms within the period specified above shall be liable for prosecution under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code.”_ 5. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that the respondents would strictly abide by the provisions contained in the guidelines Ext.P1. It is also submitted that a Screening Committee is already constituted in the respective Districts and appropriate action would be taken in accordance with the decision arrived at by the Screening Committee in tune with the guidelines contained in Ext.P1 circular. 6. Therefore, I find that the apprehension raised by the petitioners is baseless. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not received any notices so far and therefore, they are not bound to deposit the arms. As rightly pointed out by the **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 10** learned Counsel for the petitioners, the police officers cannot have any right to demand that the licenced arms shall be deposited with them. However, in case the petitioners receive notices based on the decision of the Screening Committee, as provided in Ext P1 Circular, they shall deposit the same as directed in it. These writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. **Sd/-** **P.V.ASHA JUDGE** Bb/23/11/2020 **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** ## **connected cases 11** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24926/2020** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 01/09/2009 FROM THE ELECTION COMMISSION. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2011(1)KHC 214 DATED 10/01/2011 IN W.P. (C) NO.10598/2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2019(1) KLT 1034 DATED 08/03/2019 IN W.P. (C) NO.5491/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL** _[True copy] P.A to Judge_ Bb **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** **connected cases 12** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25224/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 01/09/2009 FROM THE ELECTION COMMISSION. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2011(1) KHC 214 DATED 10/01/2011 IN W.P.(C) NO.10598/2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2019(1) KLT 1034 DATED 08/03/2019 IN W.P. (C) NO.5491/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL** _[True copy]_ _P.A to Judge_ Bb **WP(C).No.24926 OF 2020(M)&** **connected cases 13** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25569/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 01-092009 FROM THE ELECTION COMMISSION EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2011(1)KHC 214 DATED 10-01-2011 IN W.P(C) NO. 10598/2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2019(1)KLT 1034 DATED 08-03-2019 IN W.P(C) NO. 5491/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL** _[True copy] P.A to Judge_ Bb