Karnataka High Court
Smt. Laxmi R Hebbalkar vs State Of Karnataka on 12 December, 2024
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:51154
CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10209 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SMT. LAXMI R HEBBALKAR
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE/
SOCIAL SERVICE/
PRESENT MLA
BELAGAVI RURAL CONSTITUENCY,
R/O. PLOT NO.27/B,
"BASAVAKUNJ" NEAR KLE SCHOOL,
BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI - 591 108.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAMOD KATHARI SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. GANGADHAR S HOSAKERI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
MARIHAL POLICE STATION,
Digitally REPRESENTED BY THE STATE,
signed by PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING,
SUMA B N DHARWAD - 580 011.
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka 2. SANDEEP SUDI
S/O CHANDRASHEKAR SUDI
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCC. GEOLOGIST,
GOVT. OFFICIAL GAZETTED ELECTION
FLYING SQUAD OF 13-BELAGAVI,
RURAL CONSTITUENCY BELAGAVI,
TQ. BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI.
R/BY SPP. HIGH COURT DHARWAD BENCH.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA ADDL., SPP FOR R1 & R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:51154
CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 08.05.2023 FILED BY
RESPONDENT NO.2 AND FIR NUMBER 72/2023 FILED BY THE
MARIHAL POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/SEC. 171B AND 171 E OF IPC AND SEC. 123(1) OF
REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT, 1950, 1951 AND 1989 BEFORE
THE JMFC III, BELAGAVI, AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN
WHO IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.1.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.72/2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 171B and 171E of IPC and Section 123(1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and 1989 pending before JMFC III, Belagavi.
2. Heard Sri. Pramod N.Kathavi, learned Senior counsel appearing for Sri.Gangadhar S Hosakeri for the petitioner and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Addl. SPP for the respondents.
3. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Co-ordinate Bench of this -3- NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 Court has dealt with the identical issue in Crl.P.No.1560/2024 disposed of on 05.04.2024 which is followed by this Court in Crl.P.No.4866/2023.
4. In the light of the issue standing answered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and that being followed by this Court obliterate the crime against the petitioner, same benefit is extended to the present petitioner also.
5. The order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.4866/2023 is as follows;
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.35/2023 registered for offence punishable under Section 171E read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Shivaraj S. Balloli, appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, appearing for the respondents.
3. Respondent No.2 is the complainant. A complaint comes to be registered for offence punishable under Section 171E of the IPC in Crime No.35/2023 for the reason that the petitioner during the elections had arranged a lunch for several members, who according to the flying squad were voters and it would amount to ingredients of Section 171E of the IPC. Registration of the crime is what -4- NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that they were not the voters nor there is any allegation of bribery during the lunch that was allegedly arranged by the petitioner. He would submit that arranging of lunch during the period of elections would not to amount to an offence is the law laid down by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Devaraja Shetty and another vs. The State of Karnataka and another1.
5. Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would submit that the matter is at the stage of investigation and the allegations in the complaint is met as it is the flying squat who found that arrangement of lunch without permission on the said date when the complaint comes to be registered. He would submit that the investigation be permitted to be continued and the petitioner be left with the remedies available in law, in the event the investigation would go against the petitioner.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The entire issue has triggered from the complaint so registered by respondent No.2. The complaint reads as follows:
"ಇವ ೆ, ಾನ ಆರ ಕ ಉಪ- ೕ ಕರು ಾ ಶಹರ ೕ ಾ ೆ ಇವ ಂ ಾ.
!ೕ ಜಗ$ೕಶ %ಾಬು ಹುಲ ೆ() ವಯಸು,: 44 ವಷ.
ೌ0ಾಯುಕ1ರು, ನಗರಸ2ೆ ಾ 1 W.P.Nos.33839-33840/2017 DD.11.09.2017 -5- NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 ಎ4ಎ 5 01- ಾ 67ಾನಸ2ಾ ಮತ:ೇತ! 6ಷಯ: ಅಧ ರು ರಣ0ಾ> ಮ?@ಾ ಮಂಡಳ ಾ ಇವರ CೕDೆ ಾದ ೕF ಸಂ?Gೆ ಉಲHಂಘ>Jದ ಬ ೆK ಕ!ಮ LೈLೊಳOPವ ಕು ತು. ಉDೆHೕಖ : ಚುSಾವ ಾTLಾ ಗಳ LಾUಾ.ಲಯ. ಕSಾ.ಟಕ 67ಾನ ಸ2ಾ Wಾವ.F!ಕ ಚುSಾವ ೆ-2023, 01- ಾ 67ಾನ ಸ2ಾ :ೇತ! ರವರ ಆ ೇಶ ಸಂXೆ : PÀæ/E.J ï.J£ï./C£ÀĪÀÄw/¹.Dgï./ 01/2022-23 ¢£ÁAPÀ:29/03/2023 CೕDಾY Jದ 6ಷಯ Zಾಗೂ ಉDೆHೕಖದ ಅ[ಯ H ತಮ\ H 6ನಂFJLೊಳOPವ ೆSೆಂದ0ೆ, Sಾನು ಕSಾ.ಟಕ 67ಾನ ಸ2ಾ Wಾವ.F!ಕ ಚುSಾವ ೆ-2023 01- ಾ 67ಾನ ಸ2ಾ :ೇತ!ದ H ನನ ೆ ಎ4ಎ 5 5ೕ]ದ H ^ಾH_ಂ` Wಾaಡ ಅTLಾ ಅಂGಾ ಈ $ವಸ $Sಾಂಕ:
29/3/2023 ರಂದು ನನ ೆ ಕತ.ವ SೇcJದುd ಇರುತ1 ೆ.
Sೆe $Sಾಂಕ: 29/03/2023 ರಂದು ಅಧ ರು ರಣ0ಾ> ಮ?@ಾ
ಮಂಡಳ ಾ ಇವರು ಾನ ಚುSಾವ ಾTLಾ ಗಳO 01- ಾ
67ಾನಸ2ೆ ಇವ ಂ ಾ ಈ $ವಸ $Sಾಂಕ: 29/03/2023 ರಂದು 1700 ಗಂfೆ_ಂ ಾ 2200 ಗಂfೆಯವ0ೆ ೆ ಾ ಮು ,ಪg ZೈಸೂYg Cೖ ಾನದ H ಮ?@ೆಯ ಾ> ಅ ನ ಕುಂಕುಮ Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮ ಾಡಲು ಅನುಮF ಪhೆದುLೊಂ[ದುd ಅದರಂGೆ ಾ ಮು ,ಪg ZೈಸೂYgದ H Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮವನುe ಏಪ.[Jದdರು. Sಾನು ಸದ J¥ïJ¸ïnzÀ°è ಕತ.ವ ವ.?ಸುF1 ಾdಗ ಟ ಂ.` ಆjೕಸk !ೕ ಮಂಜುSಾಥ Wಾac ಇವರು ನನ ೆ mೕನ ಾ[ ಮು ,ಪg ZೈಸೂYgದ H ಏಪ.[Jರುವ ಮ?@ೆಯ ಾ> ಅ ನ ಕುಂಕುಮ Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮದ H ಊಟದ ವ ವWೆo ಾ[ Zಾಗೂ ಸದ Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮದ H pLೊYೕ[ ಮತ:ೇತ!ದ Dೋಕಸ2ಾ ಸದಸ 0ಾದ !ೕ ಅ ಾqWಾZೇಬ rೊDೆH ಇವರ Zಾ[ನ H Gೋ Jದುd ಮತು1 srೆt ಪ ದ pZೆeಗಳನುe Gೋ ಸDಾಗುF1ದುd ಆ ಬ ೆK 6.ಎ .5. nêÀiïzÀªÀgÀªÀÅ 6[uೕ ಾ[Lೊಂ[ರುGಾ10ೆ ಅಂGಾ ZೇvದಂGೆ, Sಾನು
6.ಎ .5. nêÀiïzÀªÀgÀ ಹF1ರ Zೋ> ಅವರು ಾ[Lೊಂಡ 6[uೕವನುe SೋಡDಾ>, ಸದ «rAiÉÆÃzÀ°è pLೊYೕ[ ಮತ:ೇತ!ದ Dೋಕಸ2ಾ ಸದಸ 0ಾದ !ೕ ಅ ಾqWಾZೇಬ rೊDೆH ಇವರ ಬ ೆK Gೋ Jದುd ಮತು1 ಅ ೇ -6- NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 Zಾ[ನ H srೆt ಪ ದ pZೆeಗಳO ಕಂಡು ಬಂದವw Zಾಗೂ ಸದ Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮದ H !ೕಮF ಶ ಕDಾ ಅ ಾqWಾZೇಬ rೊDೆH ಇವರು ಇದdರು.
Zಾಗೂ ಸದ Lಾಯ.ಕ!ಮದ ಸoಳದ ಒಂದು ಸoಳದ H ಜನ ೆ ಊಟದ ವ ವWೆo ಾಡDಾ>ತು1.
ಇವwಗಳ Cೕ ಂ ಾ SೋಡDಾ> ಅಧ ರು ರಣ0ಾ> ಮ?@ಾ ಮಂಡಳ ಾ ಇವರು ಾ ಮತ:ೇತ!ದ ಸಂ2ಾವ srೆt ಪ ದ ಅಭ z.Uಾದ !ೕಮF ಶ ಕDಾ ಅ ಾqWಾZೇಬ rೊDೆH ಇವ ೆ ಸZಾಯ ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆdೕಶ$ಂ ಾ ಾನ ಚುSಾವ ಾTLಾ ಗಳO 01- ಾ 67ಾನಸ2ೆ ಇವ ಂ ಾ ಪhೆದುLೊಂಡ ಅನುಮFಯನುe ಉಲHಂಘSೆ ಾ[ದ ಬ ೆK CೕDೊeೕಟLೆY ಕಂಡು ಬಂ$ರುತ1 ೆ. ಆದd ಂ ಾ ಅಧ ರು ರಣ0ಾ> ಮ?@ಾ ಮಂಡಳ ಾ ಮತು1 ಾ ಮತ:ೇತ!ದ srೆt ಸಂ2ಾವ ಅಭ z. ಶ ಕDಾ ಅ ಾqWಾZೇಬ rೊDೆH ಇವರ ಬ ೆK ಸGಾ ಸGೆ ಯನುe ಅ ಯಲು ಅವರ CೕDೆ ತನeದುd jUಾ.$ ಇದುd ಮುಂ$ನ ಕ!ಮ LೈLೊಳPಲು 6ನಂF ಇರುತ1 ೆ.
6.ಎ .5. 5ೕ]ದವ ಂ ಾ J[ಯನುe ಪhೆದುLೊಂಡು Sಾನು ತಮ\ ಮುಂ ೆ ಸ Hಸುವ ವ ವWೆo ಇ5{ರುGೆ1ೕSೆ.
ಸoಳ : ಾ
$Sಾಂಕ: 30/03/2023"
8. The crux of the complaint is the
arrangement of lunch by the petitioner on 29.03.2023 and playing a song in the lunch. This according to the flying squad would amount to an offence under Section 171E of the IPC and therefore, the crime is registered in Crime No.35/2023. The issue is whether arrangement of lunch on a particular day during the elections and playing of song as is alleged would amount to the ingredient of Section 171E of the IPC.
9. For an act to become an offence under Section 171E of the IPC, the ingredients that are depicted in Section 171B of the IPC is necessarily to be present. Section 171B of the IPC reads as follows:
"171B. Bribery.--(1) Whoever---7-
NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023
(i) gives a gratification to any person with the object of inducing him or any other 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 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."
Section 171B deals with bribery during the election. The provision is unequivocal. There is nothing left to be ambiguous. Such acts of arranging lunch or playing song in a gathering during the election would not come within the definition of bribery, as could be seen under Section 171B of the IPC.
10. The view of mine in this regard is fortified by the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court (supra), which reads as follows:
"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 accused No.1 had arranged non-vegetarian food for -8- NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 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 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.-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023 (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 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 Court if 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."
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51154 CRL.P No. 10209 of 2023
6. In that light and for the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed; and
ii) The FIR in Crime No.72/2023 registered by Marihal Police Station, Belagavi District pending on the file of the JMFC III, Belagavi District, qua the petitioner, stands quashed.
SD/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24