SRI ASHOK KHENY v. SRI SIDDARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE)

(BY SRI PRABHULING K.NAVADGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI S.B.MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE AND SRI SIDDARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024 MANNALLI POLICE STATION BIDAR - 560 005. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001.

2. SRI MANIK SHERIKAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS SST OFFICER-TEAM 1 ASSIT. AGRICULTURE OFFICE RSK, BIDAR TALUQ, BIDAR – 585 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 06.01.2024 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE 2ND ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC II BIDAR IN CC.NO. 21/2024 TAKING CONGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 171(H) OF IPC AND SECTION 127 OF REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT i.e. ANNX-C AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN WP NO. 24729/2024 BETWEEN: SRI ASHOK KHENY S/O MAHARUDRAPPA KHENY AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/O RANJOL KHENY VILLAGE BIDAR TALUK, BIDAR - 585 329. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024 ALSO HAVING OFFICE AT: M/S. NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE LTD., NO.1, MIDFORD HOUSE MIDFORD GARDENS, OFF M.G.ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. (BY SRI PRABHULING K.NAVADGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI S.B.MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE A/W., SRI SIDDARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE) ...PETITIONER AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER MANNALLI POLICE STATION BIDAR - 560 005 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001.

2. SRI ABDUL MAJEED AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS MAGISTRATE FST TEAM BAGADAL AND KAMTHANA AGRICULTURE JOINT DIRECTOR OFFICE BIDAR TALUK, BIDAR – 585 401. (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI SHARATH DODAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) ...RESPONDENTS - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DTD 27.12.2023 PASSED BY THE HONBLE 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC II BIDAR IN CC NO. 20/2024 TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES UNDER SEC 171 E OF IPC I.E. ANNEXURE-C AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER CONSEQUENTLY. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners in both these cases is common; the complainants are different and the incident on which the offences alleged are again common. Therefore, the two are taken up together and considered by this common order.

2. Heard the learned senior Counsel Sri Prabhuling K Navadgi appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri B N Jagadeesha, for the State in both the petitions and Sri Sharath S. Dodawad, learned counsel for respondent No.2 in W.P.No.24729 of 2024. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024

3. In Writ Petition No.24802 of 2024, the petitioner calls in question proceedings in C.C.No.21 of 2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 171H of the IPC and Section 127A of the Representation of the People Act. In W.P.No.24729 of 2024, what is called in question are the proceedings in C.C.No.20 of 2024 registered for offences punishable under Section 171E of the IPC.

4. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: In W.P.No.24802/2024 The petitioner contested for the elections to the Legislative Assembly of the Karnataka State from Bidar South Constituency. A complaint comes to be registered by the second respondent on usage of a Van bearing No.KA-36 / 7567 without any permission to erect flex board and usage of Mike in the said vehicle. Therefore, it becomes a crime in Crime No.21/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 171H of the IPC and Section 127 of the Representation of the People Act. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024 In W.P.No.24729/2024,

4.1. The allegation against the petitioner is that, at Bagdal Kamthana Circle, Bidar, the petitioner had arranged a political event and there were several attendees and he had put a tent next to the land of accused No.3, where meals for about 100 to 150 people were arranged, which is projected to become a bribery under Section 171E of the IPC. On the said facts, complaints come to be registered in Crime Nos.21/2023 and 32/2023, on 04.04.2023 and 03.05.2023, respectively. The police conduct investigation and after investigation, charge sheets are filed arraigning the petitioner as accused before the concerned Court. Therefore, both these petitions concern the offences alleged during the election.

5. Sri Prabhuling K. Navadgi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the offences alleged in both these cases is non-cognizable and obtaining permission from the concerned jurisdictional learned Magistrate is imperative and it is an admitted fact that permission is granted by the learned Magistrate, who was not the one - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024 constituted to grant permission in the cases under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act i.e., the Special Court.

6. Per contra, Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri Sharath Dodawad, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – complainant W.P.No.24729/2024 would vehemently contend that if a particular Court has not granted permission, it is always open for the appropriate Court to grant permission and to register a crime. They would submit that the complaint would not be washed away.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and have perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The only issue that falls for consideration is, whether the appropriate Court has granted permission to register the crimes. - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024

9. It is again an admitted fact that the permission is granted by the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC - II, Bidar, which is not the Special Court constituted to hear the cases of the people representatives. Therefore, the Magistrate of the ordinary jurisdiction should not have given the permission on the aforesaid non-cognizable offences. Since the learned senior counsel has restricted his submission on this question, which touches upon the jurisdiction and in the light of the admitted fact that the appropriate Court i.e., the Special Court has not granted permission, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings from the stage of grant of permission, its aftermath and permit the Informant or the Station House Officer as the case would be, to follow the procedure in accordance with law. Therefore, the Informant or the Station House Officer is at liberty to seek permission from the hands of the appropriate Court and the appropriate Court at which point in time shall bear in mind the observations made by this Court as to how the order granting permission, if any, should be. - 9 - NC: 2024:KHC:51574 WP No. 24802 of 2024 C/W WP No. 24729 of 2024

10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petitions are allowed. (ii) Impugned proceedings in C.C.No.20 of 2024 and C.C.No.21 of 2014 respectively, pending on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-II, Bidar, stand quashed, qua the petitioner. (iii) The matters are remitted to the hands of the Special Court for trial of cases filed against sitting as well as former MP's and MLA’s, triable by the Magistrate in the State of Karnataka constituted in terms of the Government Order No.LAW (10) LCE 2018, Bengaluru, dated 08.02.2018, and the said jurisdictional Court to regulate its procedure and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39