JOY V.A. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 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.

(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.