Licensed firearm deposit during elections can’t be via blanket order: Karnataka High Court

The bench observed, “The Election Commission guidelines explicitly emphasise the need for individualised scrutiny of firearm license holders, especially those with a history of criminal offences or involvement in rioting. Therefore, the blanket order issued by the respondent deputy commissioner disproportionately impacts vulnerable populations such as farmers living in forested areas, and those individuals who apprehend a threat to life and have secured gun licenses for their personal protection. Therefore, imposing blanket restrictions without considering these unique circumstances often leads to undue hardships and this Court is flooded with writ petitions on the eve of every ensuing election.”

The bench noted there had been other cases before the Bombay and Allahabad High Courts which had made similar observations. It was also observed that a dangerous precedent was set by issuing blanket orders, and there had been no individual review in the present case.

While allowing the petitions, the court also set forth several directions. The court directed authorities not to issue blanket orders, and also noted that cognizance of vulnerable communities facing crop damage had to be taken, and a balance struck with requirements of law and order. The court also stated people like advocates and activists exposed to risks could not be made vulnerable via a blanket order, as they might need their weapons more during such times.

Among other guidelines, the court directed that a screening process of firearm owners should be done before elections to prioritise those with a criminal history, and any orders and communications regarding firearms should be in written form to avoid misinterpretation.