Karnataka High Court
Devaraja Shetty vs State Of Karnataka on 11 September, 2017
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
WRIT PETITION Nos.33839-33840 OF 2017 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. Devaraja Shetty,
S/o Ramanna Shetty,
Aged about 41 years,
R/a Behind Kountheya Hotel,
Jayanagara, Chikmagalur,
Karnataka, Pin:577101.
2. Srinivasa @ Kote Srinivasa,
S/o Late Thimmaiah,
Aged about 69 years,
R/a Kote, Chickmagalur Town,
Karnataka-577101.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. Vikas, Advocate for
Sri. Sachin B.S. Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
By Town Police, Chikmagalur,
Represented by SPP,
High Court of Karnataka,
High Court Building,
Bangalore - 560 001.
2
2. Srinivas L.G.,
S/o Gugutaiah,
Aged about 38 years,
MCC Chief Officer,
Kasaba Hobli, Chikmagalur,
Karnataka, Pin:577101.
...Respondents
(By Sri. S. Rachaiah, HCGP for R-1)
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226
& 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash
the entire proceedings in C.C.No.351/2013 in the
Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Chikkamagaluru initiated as
against the petitioners based on the complaint filed
by R-2 Srinivasa.L.G. for offences punishable under
Section-171E of I.P.C, 1860 vide Annexure-A.
These writ petitions coming on for Orders, this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Heard Sri. Vikas, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. Sachin B.S., for petitioners and Sri. Rachaiah learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State and perused the records.
2. Petitioners are seeking for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.351/2013 pending on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chikkamagaluru registered for offences 3 punishable under Section 171E of IPC on the basis of complaint filed by respondent No.2.
3. Respondent No.2 was on election duty of Vidhanasabha election held during 2013 and on 31.01.2013, respondent No.2-complainant noticed that petitioner No.1 had made arrangements for preparation of non-vegetarian food in his car shed with an intention to induce voters to vote for Bharathiya Janatha Party and based on said tip off received, headed to the place, conducted raid at 1.45 pm and found preparation of non-vegetarian food near Catholic Church Club by Accused No.2. Accordingly, complaint came to be lodged before Chikkmagaluru Town Police Station by respondent No.2 herein, based on which investigation was conducted and charge came to be filed in C.C.No.351/2013 against petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 171E of IPC. For quashing 4 of said proceedings, petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court.
4. It is the contention of Sri.Vikas, learned counsel appearing for petitioners that allegations made in the complaint is that petitioners have arranged to distribute non-vegetarian food and definition of bribery as indicated under Section 171 and as indicated in Section 171B, there should be an offer or an attempt or one should have agreed to give gratification. But in present case, no such allegation is made regarding the presence of people assembled at the place where raid came to be conducted so as to receive food purportedly prepared by petitioners for being distributed to voters. He would contend, even if allegation made in the complaint are left uncontroverted, no offence is made out. Allegations made in the complaint and continuation of trial would only be an exercise in futility. Hence, he prays for quashing of said proceedings. He would also 5 contend that no food was seized at the venue and had been sent to laboratory for testing. This would only indicate that no such incident had taken place. Hence, he prays for quashing of the proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for respondents would contend that petitioners with an intention of influencing the voters, had made arrangements to prepare non-vegetarian food for being distributed to voters and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 171E of IPC and same has to be examined after trial. Hence, he submits that prayer sought for by petitioners is liable to be rejected and prays for rejection of the petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of records in general and complaint lodged by respondent No.2 in particular it would disclose that complainant had alleged that he was on election duty of Vidhanasabha Election 2013 and on 31.01.2013, he found that 6 accused No.1 had arranged non-vegetarian food for about 50 to 100 persons being prepared at the car shed of the residence of accused No.1. On enquiry, he came to know that same had been prepared at the instance of accused No.2. As such utensils found there came to be seized. On this ground, complaint came to be lodged by respondent No.2 alleging that petitioners have committed offence under Section 171E. Section 171E of IPC reads as under;
"Whoever commits the offence of bribery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both:
Provided that bribery by treating shall be punished with fine only.
Explanation- "Treating" means that form of bribery where the gratification consists in food, drink, entertainment, or provision."
Bribery as indicated above is defined under Section 171 B of IPC and it reads as under;
" Bribery - (1) Whoever-
i) give a gratification to any persons with the object of inducing him or any other 7 person to exercise any electoral right or of rewarding any person for having exercised any such right; or
ii) accepts either for himself or for any other person any gratification as a reward for himself or exercising any such right or for inducing or attempting to induce any other person to exercise any such right;
commits the offence of bribery:
Provided that a declaration of public policy or a promise of public action shall not be an offence under this section.
(2) A person who offers, or agrees to give, or offers or attempts to procure, a gratification shall be deemed to give a gratification.
(3) A person who obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a gratification shall be deemed to accept a gratification, and a person who accepts a gratification as a motive for doing what he does not intend to do, or as a reward for doing what he has not done, shall be deemed to have accepted the gratification as a reward.
7. Keeping the definition referred to hereinabove and complaint lodged by respondent No.2 with respondent No.1 is examined, it does not remotely suggest that ingredients of Section 171E is attracted. The complaint as well as 8 seizure/panchanama does not disclose about food having been prepared and kept ready for distribution as alleged. That apart, incident to attract Section 171E, it should satisfy the definition of Section-171B i.e. there should be bribery namely, offer or attempt to give gratification. Averments or allegations made in the complaint do not remotely suggest that persons who are supposed to vote had assembled at the venue for receiving the food (which is alleged as bribery by prosecution). Arrangements for preparation of non- vegetarian food by itself would not attract the definition of "bribery" as defined under Section 171B. That apart, no food was seized and alleged preparation of non-vegetarian food was at 11.45 AM, yet complaint was lodged at 7.45 PM belatedly.
8. In that view of the matter, petitioner is justified in contending that even if allegations made in the complaint remain uncontroverted, no offence under Section 171E can be made out. Hence, this 9 Court is of considered view that continuation of proceedings against petitioners would be an abuse of process of law and it would not serve any fruitful purpose.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER
i) Writ petitions are hereby allowed;
ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.351/2013 pending on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chikkamagaluru, insofar as petitioners are concerned is hereby quashed and they are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 171E of IPC.
SD/-
JUDGE SB