IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the registration of a crime must be based on a complaint that makes out an offence against the accused, and if the complaint does not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the registration of the crime can be quashed.

ORDER :

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question registration of crime in Crime No.89 of 2023 pending before the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Harapanahalli, Vijayanagara District for offence punishable under Section 171F of the IPC.

2. Heard Sri Uday Holla, learned senior counsel along with Sri. Vinod Kumar, Mrs.Pooja Savadatti and Sri. Pavan Narang Neeraj for the petitioner and Sri B.A.Belliyappa, learned State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1.

3. Facts adumbrated are as follows:-

The petitioner is the National President of Bharatiya Janata Party (‘BJP’) and a former Union Minister. He is presently a Member of Parliament from Bilaspur Parliamentary Constituency, in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Elections to the Karnataka State Legislative Assembly were slated to be held on 10th May 2023 for which Election Code of Conduct was put in operation from 30th April, 2023. A public meeting was organized by the BJP on 07-05-2023 at the IB Circle, Harapanahalli Assembly Constituency of Vijayanagar District. At about 1.00 p.m. the petitioner is said to have addressed a public meeting wherein it is alleged that he has wooed or threatened voters which was recorded by the officials of Election Commission. Recordings of the public meeting were published in electronic media and social media. This leads to registration of a complaint before the 1st respondent/Police on 9-05-2023 for the offence punishable under Section 171F of the IPC. Since Section 171F is a non-cognizable offence, the Police registered NC No.11 of 2023 and transmitted the file to the learned Magistrate seeking permission to register a FIR. In terms of Section 155 of the Cr.P.C, for registration of FIR on a non-cognizable offence, permission of the Magistrate is imperative. The permission comes to be granted. After the grant of permission, the issue becomes crime in Crime No.89 of 2023. The registration of crime leads the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned senior counsel, would contend that a perusal at the complaint would not indicate any ingredient of Section 171F of the IPC. Therefore, the very registration of crime suffers from want of bona fides. He would further contend that the learned Magistrate has accorded his permission by the word “permitted” which does not bear any application of mind and, therefore, is contrary to law. He would seek quashment of proceedings.

5. Per contra the learned State Public Prosecutor Sri B.A.Belliyappa, would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that the issue is still in the crime stage. At least investigation should be permitted. Without permitting investigation if the Court were to quash the proceedings, it would be contrary to several judgments of the Apex Court which hold that the complaint cannot be treated as an encyclopedia of offences. He would contend that even if the Court wants to set aside registration of crime on the ground that the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind, the matter could be remitted back to the hands of the learned Magistrate for appropriate action in accordance with law.

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

7. The incident that led to registration of crime, is as narrated hereinabove, and would not require any reiteration, as it is a solitary incident of speaking in a public gathering. The allegation is threatening or wooing the voters. A complaint comes to be registered by the flying squad team of election commission on 09-05-2023. Since the entire issue has sprung from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint which reads as follows:

The complaint is for the offence punishable under Section 171F of the IPC. Section 171F reads as follows:

“171-F. Punishment for undue influence or personation at an election.—Whoever commits the offence of undue influence or personation at an election shall be punished with imprisonment of