When a flying squad or the Static Surveillance Teams seize cash during an election, must the reasons for the seizure be reduced in writing?

Yes. Although the Standard Operating Procedures indicate sufficient leeway for subjective satisfaction, the likeliness of the material being used for untoward purposes has to be reduced in writing by the concerned officer, so does the suspicion of commission of crime leading the flying squad to seize articles/cash. The authority affecting the seizure must, within 24 hours, report the same to the District Magistrate or the Court having competent jurisdiction along with written reasons disclosing the prima facie nexus between the cash or other asset seized and the suspected electoral offence.

Constitution of India — Art. 324 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.321 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.171E, 188 — Representation of the People Act, 1951 — elections — black money — electoral offences — seizure of cash — withdrawal of cases — Constitution of India — Art. 324 — Election Commission — powers wide but not plenary — Held: Article 324 vests superintendence, direction and control of elections in the Election Commission; that power is wide but not plenary and operates only where the field is unoccupied by legislation. Controlling black money in the electoral process is one of its responsibilities. (¶10, 12) Constitution of India — Art. 324 — seizure of cash — reasons to be reduced in writing — Held further: On a seizure of cash or other assets, the suspicion of commission of crime and the likeliness of the material being used for untoward purposes must be reduced in writing, and the seizure reported within 24 hours. (¶17, 18) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.321 — withdrawal of cases — approval of the concerned High Court — Held further: A case arising from an electoral offence is not to be withdrawn as the norm; for candidates in a particular election cycle the approval of the concerned High Court is mandatory, a change in political dispensation being no ground. (¶17, 18) Constitution of India — Art. 324 — investigation and prosecution — completion within a year, designated courts — Held further: An investigation into an electoral offence must be completed within a year, with reasons recorded and a quarterly status report to the Election Commission where that timeline is exceeded; High Courts may designate courts for prompt hearing and disposal. Directions issued. (¶17, 18)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR v. PRATHIK PARASRAMPURIA — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India