IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1264 OF 2026 (482(Cr.PC)

/ 528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SIR. RAVI KRISHNA REDDY S/O LATE KRISHNA REDDY V AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 46. GATEWAY PARK. NEW TEMPLE ROAD BHSV MAPER APART BANGALORE- 560047 AND ALSO- AT RESIDING NO-222, B-4. THUNGABHADRA BLOCK NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BANGALORE SOUTH VIVEKNAGAR BENGALURU Digitally signed by KARNATAKA 560047 VIJAYA P Location: (AS PER AADHAR ADDRESS MENTIONED)

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2. MAHESH A V S/O VENKTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS NO. 44 ARALERI VILLAGE.

KASABA HOBALI MALUR TALUK PH N, KOLAR DISTRICT PIN 563130 (AS PER AADHAR ADDRESS MENTIONED)

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINATHA B.V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GUL PET POLICE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001

2. SRI. AMARAPPA EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,KOLAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, PLAYING SQUAD-9 KOLAR DISTRICT- 563 135 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. THEJESH H.P., HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CC NO.124/2025 NOW WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KOLAR CRIME REGISTER BY GUL PET POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 171(H) R/W 34 IPC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

Sri. Thejesh H.P. learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondents.

2. The petitioners have sought to set aside the proceedings in C.C.No.134/2025, pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar in connection with FIR registered relating to offence punishable under Section

171(H) read with Section 34 IPC.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the FIR has been registered on the basis of information of the respondent No. 2 and perusal of the FIR would reveal that the incident that is narrated is that, during the election to the Lok Sabha, as regards Kolar constituency, the petitioners along with others including about 25 workers were campaigning using a vehicle and had put up banners on the vehicle, and had also fixed microphones and loud speakers and were distributing pamphlets to the public in relation to election campaign. On being questioned by the Police Authorities, it was found that they had obtained permission only for use of vehicles and no permission was obtained for activities of distribution of pamphlets and collection of funds.

4. Accordingly, the respondent-Police Authorities have taken steps purportedly on the ground of violation of directions of the Election Commission relating to the Model Code of Conduct. Upon evidence collected by way of photographs, initially NCR 434/2024 was registered and after obtaining oral permission investigation has been commenced is the case.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a narration of the incident at para 10 of the FIR, does not correlate with the filing of charge sheet for offence under 171(H) r/w Section 34 of IPC. Attention is drawn to the charge sheet filed and insofar as the petitioners are concerned, offence that is made out is 171(H) of IPC as well as Section 123 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951.

6. Petitioners counsel further submits that 171(H)

of IPC relates to payments in connection with election activity and submits that where expenditure is incurred for holding a public meeting or relating to advertisement, or for publication, or for purpose of promoting or procuring election of such candidate and such expenditure is incurred without the authority of the candidate, then 171(H) of IPC would come into play and in the present case the incident makes out the allegation of petitioners not having taken permission for distribution of pamphlets etc. Acco