'Reckless and loosely laid offence', Karnataka HC while quashing FIR against J P Nadda

The FIR was registered by the Harapanahalli police in connection with his speech delivered on May 7, 2023 on the allegation that he wooed as well as threatened the voters.

The Karnataka High Court has termed as “reckless registration of crime and a loosely laid offence”, the FIR registered against Jagath Prakash Nadda, national president of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The crime was registered by the Harapanahalli police in connection with his speech delivered on May 7, 2023 on the allegation that he wooed as well as threatened the voters by stating that they would lose the benefit of central schemes if they were to vote against the then ruling party, BJP.

The Harapanahalli police in Vijayanagar district had invoked IPC section 171F which carries up to one year imprisonment, as punishment for undue influence or personation at an election. It was argued that the complaint doesn't indicate any ingredients of section 171F and added that the magistrate too had only written ‘permitted’ while according permission and the same depicts non- application of mind.

Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that for an offence punishable under section 171F, the ingredients under section 171C (undue influence at elections), section 171D (personation at elections) has to be there in the complaint. The bench cited the State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal case that three of the seven postulates defined by the Apex Court for interference at the crime stage are applicable in the case at hand. The court said that there is lack of prima facie material in the complaint, allegations are absurd and inherently improbable in nature and it is seemingly a maliciously instituted complaint.

“The complaint nowhere narrates that the petitioner has unduly interfered with the free exercise of anyone’s electoral right, nor does it narrates that the petitioner is guilty of personation as defined under Section 171D of the IPC in the elections. An incident to become an offence under Section 171F, the minimum requirement is narration in the complaint of the ingredients of undue influence or personation. The allegation is that Code of Conduct has been violated by the petitioner, on speaking at a public gathering on May 7,2023 by threatening the voters. The complaint is so vague that it would daunt vagueness itself. On such a vague complaint which is loosely made against the petitioner, the crime is registered and the damocles sword of crime is left hanging on the petitioner projecting it to be an offence,” the court said.