IC 35-47-2-24 Indictment or information; defendant's burden to prove exemption or license; arrest, effect of production of valid license, or establishment of exemption Sec. 24. (a) In an information or indictment brought for the
enforcement of any provision of this chapter, it is not necessary to negate any exemption specified under this chapter, or to allege the absence of a license required under this chapter. The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, or that he has a license as required under this chapter. (b) Whenever a person who has been arrested or charged with a violation of section 1 of this chapter presents a valid license to the prosecuting attorney or establishes that he is exempt under section 2 of this chapter, any prosecution for a violation of section 1 of this chapter shall be dismissed immediately, and all records of an arrest or proceedings following arrest shall be destroyed immediately. As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.
It does not relieve you from your responsibility to prove you are legal. It just means that if you are legal but don't have your LTCH with you and get arrested, you will win in the end. The difference is that before you had to have it with you or you could be prosecuted for not being licensed even if you produced it later.
Nowhere does it say I must surrender it upon demand in what you posted.
They can check to see if I'm licensed easily enough. If they arrest me for not having it I WILL waste every bit of everyone's time that I can before I produce it.
And they better not call it a "permit" either because I don't have one of those.