Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 15910
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
BASANAGOUDA R PATIL (YATNAL) – Appellant
Versus
MANJUNATH SUBASHCHANDRA KALABURGI – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2724 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.VENKATESH P DALWAI
For the Respondents: SRI.JAGADEESHA B.N.
The court quashed proceedings under Section 188 of IPC due to lack of evidence showing disobedience causing harm or risk, emphasizing the need for substantial grounds to avoid abuse of process.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 188 - Quashing of private complaint - Allegation of violation of election model code of conduct by petitioner during campaigning - Court finds no substantial evidence of disobedience causing risk or injury as required under Section 188 - Proceedings quashed to prevent abuse of process of law. (Paras 7, 8)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - High Court's power to quash proceedings - Court emphasizes that continuation of proceedings without adequate grounds constitutes an abuse of process. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, involved in a political campaign, was accused of violating the election model code of conduct by making statements that allegedly disobeyed an order promulgated by a public servant, leading to the filing of a private complaint under Section 188 of IPC.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the allegations do not meet the necessary criteria under Section 188, as there was no evidence of harm or risk arising from the petitioner's statements during the campaign.
Issues: The main issue addressed was whether the petitioner's statements constituted disobedience under Section 188 of IPC and if the complaint was maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the complaint did not substantiate the necessary elements of Section 188, as no actual harm or risk was demonstrated, thus quashing the proceedings as an abuse of process.
Result: Criminal Petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. reliefs sought in criminal petition. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"a) Quash the private complaint and its further proceedings against the petitioner in PCR.No.124/2023 (now C.C.No.1728/2023) for the alleged offence p/u/s 188 of IPC, pending before the I Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. Court at Gadag, in the interest of justice.
b) To set aside the order of cognizance passed by the 1st Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC -I Court, at Gadag in PCR No.124/2023 (now CC No.1728/2023) for the alleged offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC, vide order dated 08.11.2023, in the interest of justice."
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional SPP for respondent.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner and respondent in the present petition were before this Court in Criminal Petition No.12996/2023 which was allowed and disposed of vide final order dated 22.08.2024, which reads as hereunder:
"Petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.573 of 2023 registered for offence punishable under Section 188 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri Venkatesh P Dalwai, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri B N Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
3. The petitioner was campaigning for a candidate belonging to local constituency at Gadag.
It transpires that the 2nd respondent, the Flying Squad, found that the petitioner during the campaigning process was interviewed and the same was video graphed in which he had made certain statements, which according to the complaint would become an offence under Section 188 of the IPC. The concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence by its order dated 11-05-2023 and issues summons to the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order of taking of cognizance and issuing of summons is before this Court in this subject petition.
4. Learned counsel Sri.Venkatesh P Dalwai appearing for petitioner would submit that that a perusal of the complaint or the order of taking cognizance nowhere would meet the ingredients of Section 188 of the IPC and therefore, would seek quashment of the entire proceedings pending before the concerned Court for the aforesaid offence.
5. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would submit that the issue would be whether a code of conduct notified under Article 324 of the Constitution of India would become applicable to an offence under Section 188 of the IPC which would be disobedience to an order duly promulgated by a public servant. He would submit that the petitioner is guilty of the offence and would require him to come out clean in a full blown trial. He would seek dismissal of the petition.
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 afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The entire issue has now triggered from the registration of the complaint. The complaint so registered by the respondent reads as follows: : . ( ), : 59 , :
.The concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence and issues summons to the petitioner. The order of taking of cognizance reads as follows:
“Perused the complaint, and the documents along with it.
The complainant Sri. Manjunath Kalburgi, Assistant Engineer PMGSY, Gadag being the Flying Squad officer has filed the present private complaint U/sec 200 of Cr.P.C alleging commission of offence by the accused U/sec 188 of IPC.
It is alleged that the accused by name Sri. Basanagouda R. Patil (Yatnal) after his election campaign held at Gadag town in support of the party candidate has made a statement saying that all the Hindus would boycott the Congress party, thereby violating the election model code of conduct. It is stated that the video clip of the said statement made by the accused has been uploaded in the youtube. It is alleged tha
