HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CRIMINAL PETITION No.166 OF 2025

ORDER

Heard Mr. T.V. Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Shalini Saxena, learned counsel representing Mr. Palle Nageswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 - State.

2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.268 of 2024 pending on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Cases under Prohibition Act (Excise Court), Hyderabad.

3. The petitioner herein is the sole accused in the aforesaid C.C. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 171-C & 171-F read with 188 and 506 of IPC and Section - 123 (2) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (for short ‘R.P. Act’).

4. On the complaint lodged by respondent No.2, MCC Nodal Officer, Kamalapur (MPDO, Kamalapur), Sub-Inspector of Police, Kamalapur Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.247 of 2023 against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. As per the report given by respondent No.2, dated 29.11.2023 to the police, the allegations levelled against the petitioner herein are as follows:

i. The petitioner herein is the contesting candidate for 31 Huzurabad Assembly Constituency on behalf of Bharathiya Rashtra Samithi (BRS) Party for the General Elections held in the year 2023.

ii. On 28.11.2023 between 11.00 A.M. and 12.00 noon, the petitioner violated the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) by saying “Meeru Vote Veyakunte Maa Mugguru Shavalanu Chudandi ani esandharbanga Teliajesthunnanu, Meeru Vote vesi lead isthe Vijayayatraku Vostha, ledante Maa Shava Yatraku Meeru Randi”. (i.e., If you don’t vote, then be prepared to see the dead bodies of three of us. I am telling you this in that context. If you vote and give us a lead, we will begin a victory procession; otherwise, you have to come to our funeral procession).

iii. After verifying the Video record submitted by VST Team on

28.11.2023, respondent No.2 gave the aforesaid report with the Police concerned to take action against the petitioner on the ground that the aforesaid statements would amount to violation of MCC.

5. After receipt of the aforesaid report, the police, Kamalapur Police Station, registered the aforesaid crime. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of respondent No.2 as LW.1, Mr. K. Veeraswamy, Head Constable-642 of the very same Police Station as LW.2 as he is the circumstantial witness and Member of MCC Team; Mr. Abdul Wahed, Senior Assistant in Panchayat Raj Department, Huzurabad as LW.3 as he the eye witness who submitted the Video Report and spoke the facts of the case; Mr. Ande Ravinder and Mr. Tanguturi Anand as LWs.4 and 5, the eye-witnesses, and LWs.6 and 7 are panch witnesses.

6. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer laid charge sheet against the petitioner for the aforesaid charges and learned Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner vide C.C. No.314 of 2024 by learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hanamkonda. Later it was transferred to the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Cases under Prohibition Act (Excise Court), Hyderabad and the aforesaid C.C. was re-numbered as C.C. No.268 of 2024. Perusal of the statement of L.W.1 would reveal that he has reiterated the contents of the complaint, dated 29.11.2023, while LWs.2 to 5 reiterated what they have stated in their statements made under Section - 161 of Cr.P.C.

7. It is apt to note that Section - 188 of IPC which deals with ‘disobedience to order duly promulgated by a public servant’ and the same is extracted as under:

“188. Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant.—Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in