Police Can't Deprive A Person Of Right Of Franchise If No Case Registered Against Him/Her On Account Of Unlawful Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Before the Bench of Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, Petitioners in their plea alleged that the respondent police officials are making efforts to prevent the petitioners from exercising their right of franchise on the date of election i.e., 09^th February 2021.

Background of the Matter

Both the petitioners are brothers and the daughter of the 1^st petitioner has been contesting the election for the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, R.Nagulavaram Village, Kurnool District, which was held today, i.e., on 09^th February 2021.

It was stated that when they have been canvassing for the candidate, the respondent police officials prevented them from canvassing.

Alleging that the said action on the part of the respondent police officials is unconstitutional, arbitrary and illegal, the petitioners sought for declaration that their acts are unconstitutional and consequently, to direct the respondent police officials not to prevent the petitioners from exercising their franchise in the ensuing elections.

Arguments put forth by State

The Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that both the petitioners are rowdy sheeters and in view of their past history involving in criminal acts that rowdy sheets have been opened against both the petitioners and the same are still pending.

Therefore, it was argued that only to prevent the petitioners from indulging in any unlawful activities during the period of elections and on the date of election that the respondent police officials are only taking preventive measures to maintain law and order in the village and they never prevented the petitioners from canvassing on behalf of their candidate.

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court remarked that as the petitioners are rowdy sheeters, the respondent police officials have got duty to prevent them from indulging in any unlawful activities and to maintain law and order in the village during the period of elections and on the date of election.

Therefore, the Court said,

"If any action is initiated by the respondent police officials in a lawful manner to prevent the petitioners from indulging in any unlawful activities to maintain law and order, the same cannot be found fault with."

However, the Court further said,

"At the same time, the right of the petitioners to exercise their franchise, being registered voters in the said elections, is also valuable right and a legal right which is also required to be protected in the facts and circumstances of the case."

Significantly, the Court directed the petitioners not to indulge in any unlawful activities during the course of elections, and to cooperate with the respondent police officials in maintaining law and order in the village during the period of elections and for peaceful conduct of the elections

Apart from that, the Court also directed the respondent police officials not to unnecessarily arrest the petitioners without there being any crime registered against them.

The respondent police officials were also directed not to prevent the petitioners from exercising their right of franchise and also, not to prevent them from canvassing on behalf of the candidate of their choice in a lawful manner during the permissible hours.

The Writ Petition was, accordingly, disposed of.

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order