ORDER

The petitioner calls in question the proceedings in C.C.No.30801/2021 which arose out of crime in crime No.62/2019 for the following offences punishable under Section 171H of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 133 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and 1988.

2. Heard Sri. Arnav A. Bagalwadi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Mahesh Shetty, learned HCGP appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that against accused No.1 and 5 in the same crime, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.4524/2022 has quashed the proceedings in terms of its order dated 27.09.2022. The order passed by the Co-ordinate bench reads as follows:

"Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 and 5 have called in question the validity of the proceedings in C.C.No. 30801/2021 pending on the file of the XLII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Special Court to deal with Criminal Cases related to sitting as well as former MPs/MLAs triable by Magistrate in Karnataka).

2. Respondent No.2 while working as an officer offlying squad has made out information to the policeauthorities regarding violation of election code of conductwhile campaigning. The information that was made out to the police authorities was that, on 20.04.2019 at 2.00 p.m. when the de-facto complainant was on rounds, he noticed that the accused were campaigning at 5.00 p.m. in front of the Hiriyur Open Auditorium in an open vehicle bearing No.KA34-M-8472. It was further revealed upon enquiry that no permission was obtained to campaign at that place. Accordingly, information came to be made out to the police authorities as against the accused who were campaigning to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. The first information report came to be lodged on 22.04.2019 as regards the offences punishable under Section 171H of IPC and Section 133 of the Representation of People Act.

3. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed. Column No.17 of the charge sheet reads as follows:

4. Thus, it is clear that the only offence made out in the charge sheet is Section 171H of IPC. Section 171H of IPC is an offence that relates to illegal payments in connection with an election. The offence as made out under Section 171H is as regards incurring or authorizing expenses on account of holding of any public meeting or making expenditure relating to advertisement, circular or publication or for the purpose of promoting or procuring the election of such candidate. It is clear that expenditure to be incurred must be with general or special authority in writing of the candidate. The information given to the police authorities relate to the act of campaigning without permission and that is also the sum and substance of the charge sheet at Column No.17, which is reproduced above. Clearly, the facts that have made out the offence is not the offence under Section 171H of IPC. Charge sheet filed for offence has nothing to do with the facts as made out in the complaint as recorded in the FIR as well as made out in Column No.17 of the charge sheet.

5. It is necessary to state that apart from the matter on merits, the procedure under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. also regarding obtaining of permission for non-cognizable offence has not been followed. It is necessary to observe that the investigation that is conducted is clearly sloppy investigation and there appears to be no bonafides in making genuine efforts to file charge sheet. Keeping in mindthe nature of offence made out as narrated above the offence under Section 171H of IPC has nothing to do with the facts as made out in the FIR and charge sheet. It is only expected that serious efforts be made by those entrusted with duties to ensure adherence to election code of conduct which would go a long way in preserving purity of the election process.

6. Accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No. 30801/2021 pending on the file of the XLII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Special