BENGALURU - 560 001 v. (BY SRI.B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1)

SRI MARUTHI S/O.GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.196, 1ST CROSS, KOTTIGEPALYA, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE-560 079. (BY SMT. DEEPA L KALLIMANI.,ADVOCATE) AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KAMAKSHIPALYA POLICE, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. …PETITIONER NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2. SRI.TEJU V.S S/O. SATHYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ADTP, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 098. (BY SRI.B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) …RESPONDENTS PROCEEDINGS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE IN AGAINST C.C.NO.30791/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 42nd A.C.M.M BENGALURU REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 171(E) AND 188 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.123(1)(A) OF REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLES ACT U/S 3 AND 7 OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT 1955 SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER CONCERN. PETITIONER THE - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:51148 CRL.P No. 13164 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The present petitioner is accused No.2 qua accused No.1. The Coordinate Bench of this Court Crl.P.No.5912/2023 vide order dated 02.02.2024 quashes the proceedings, which is as follows; "This Petition seeks quashment of FIR in Crime No.222/2018 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru. The FIR alleges offences punishable u/Ss 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Section 123(A) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and Sections 188 & 171E of the IPC, 1860. argues that no learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the 2. search & Petitioner investigation can be undertaken by the Police for the offences punishable u/Ss 3 & 7 of the EC Act, in the absence of a complaint filed by the competent authority as provided under Paragraph No.16 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution System in respect of electoral (Control) Order; offences punishable u/Ss 171E & 188 of IPC, unless the bar enacted in Section 195 of Cr.P.C. 1973 is jumped, the Police have no role; lastly, the allegations as to the violation of Section 123A of 1951 Act is concerned, they are ridiculous since no offence is enacted there. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for the - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:51148 CRL.P No. 13164 of 2024 Respondents opposed the Petition making submission in justification of the impugned proceedings.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner. Firstly, the complaint in respect of EC Act is not lodged by the competent authority. Learned counsel is right in saying that even for undertaking search & seizure, the sanction of the authority is a must. This apart, Section 11 bars taking of cognizance of any offence punishable under the provisions of the Act except on a report of the particular public servant. Section

4. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is also right in contending that no prosecution lies for the electoral offences punishable u/Ss 171E & 188 of IPC of IPC unless the requirement of Section 195 of Cr.P.C. is satisfied. It is notable that Section 171E prescribes a punishment of one year imprisonment, or with fine or with both. Similarly, a punishment of one month imprisonment or Rs.2,000/- as fine, or both. Thus, they are non-cognizable offences. Therefore, the Trial Court could not have taken cognizance of the said offences except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned. The Chargesheet the Police after investigation in its present form & substance cannot be construed as the “complaint in writing of the public servant”. prescribes filed by 188 In the above circumstances, this Petition succeeds; in C C No.30791/2021 pending on the file of learned Vth ACMM, Bengaluru and registration of proceedings - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:51148 CRL.P No. 13164 of 2024 Crime No. 222/2018 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru, are hereby quashed, so far as the Petitioner is concerned.

2. Following the said order passed by Coordinate Bench qua accused No.3 in the same crime, this Court quashes the proceedings in Crl.P.No.3628/2024 by following order; The petitioner is before this Court, seeking for

2. the following prayer: Quash / Set aside the entire proceedings against "i) the Petitioner in C.C.No.30791/2021 pending on the file of the 42nd Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bengaluru registered for the offences Punishable U/s 171(E) & 188 R/w Sec 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sec 123 (1) (A) of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, U/S 3&7 of Essential Commodities Ac, 1955 So far as the Petitioner concern in the interest of justice. ii) Pass such other order/s which are deemed to be fit in the nature and circumstance of the case, in the interest of justice."

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5912/2023 disposed on 02.02.2024, wherein it has held as follows: “This Petition seeks quashment of FIR in Crime No.222/2018 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru. The FIR alleges offences punishable u/Ss 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Section 123(A) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and Sections 188 & 171E of the IPC, 1860. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:51148 CRL.P No. 13164 of 2024

2. learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the Petitioner argues that no search & investigation can be undertaken by the Police for the offences punishable u/Ss 3 & 7 of the EC Act, in the absence of a complaint filed by the competent authority as provided under Paragraph No.16 of Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution System (Control) Order; in respect of electoral offences punishable u/Ss 171E & 188 of IPC, unless the bar enacted in Section 195 of Cr.P.C. 1973 is jumped, the Police have no role; lastly, the allegations as to the violation of Section 123A of 1951 Act is concerned, they are ridiculous since no offence is enacted there. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for the Respondents opposed the Petition making submission in justification of the impugned proceedings.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner. Firstly, the complaint in respect of EC Act is not lodged by the competent authority. Learned counsel is right in saying that even for undertaking search & seizure, the sanction of the authority is a must. This apart, Section 11 bars taking of cognizance of any offence punishable under the provisions of the Act except on a report of the particular public servant.

4. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is also right in contending that no prosecution lies for the electoral offences punishable u/Ss 171E & 188 of IPC of IPC unless the requirement of Section 195 of Cr.P.C. is satisfied. It is notable that Section 171E prescribes a punishment of one year imprisonment, or with fine or with both. Similarly, Section 188 prescribes a punishment of one month imprisonment or Rs.2,000/- as fine, or both. Thus, they are non-cognizable offences. Therefore, cognizance of the said offences except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned. The Chargesheet filed by the Police after investigation in its present form & substance cannot be construed as the “complaint in writing of the public servant”. the Trial Court could not have In the above circumstances, this Petition succeeds; the proceedings in C C No.30791/2021 pending on the file of learned Vth ACMM, Bengaluru and registration of - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:51148 CRL.P No. 13164 of 2024 Crime No. 222/2018 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru, are hereby quashed, so far as the Petitioner is concerned."

4. In the light of the issue standing covered by judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court supra, the petition stands disposed on the same terms.

3. In the light of the issue answered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court and also covered under platero of judgments rendered by this Court, the petition succeeds.

4. For the aforesaid reasons, the criminal petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.30791/2021 pending on the file of the 42nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, stand quashed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11