THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7644 OF 2025 Mr. B. Mayur Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. S. Ganesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

Mr. E. Ganesh, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

ORDER:

1. The petitioner prays for quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.80 of 2025 for the offences under sections 171(H) and 188 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trial of cases relating to MPs and MLAs at Hyderabad.

2. The C.C. originates from a Complaint dated 14.05.2024 made by the de facto complainant to the Inspector of Police, Domalguda, Hyderabad. The Complaint relates to an incident on 10.05.2024 at 07:30 hours involving the petitioner along with a few other members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) entering Indira Park through the gate located near the Ramakrishna Matam while raising slogans including ‘Jai BJP’. The Complaint also mentions that the petitioner interacted with morning walkers and campaigned for BJP (Political Party) by saying ‘Vote for BJP’

without any prior permission from the appropriate Officers.

3. A Chargesheet was filed against the petitioner on 14.05.2024 pursuant to FIR No.170 of 2023. The Chargesheet records the brief facts of the case. The facts recorded are a repetition of those in the Complaint and are as follows:

4. The Police received a written Complaint on 14.05.2024 at 20:00 hours from one Sri K. Janardhan stating that on 10.05.2024 at 07:30 hours, ‘BJP leader’ Sri Dr. K. Laxman (the petitioner) along with other members entered Indira Park raising slogans such as ‘Jai BJP’. The petitioner interacted with morning walkers and campaigned for BJP by saying ‘Vote for BJP’ without taking any prior permission from the appropriate Officers. The Chargesheet further records the statements of witnesses and the evidence collected during the course of investigation including that of LW.2 who is a security guard at Indira Park and concludes that a prima facie case has been established against the petitioner/accused for committing offences punishable under sections 171(H) and 188 of the IPC.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State have made their respective submissions. The de facto complainant is not represented.

6. Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner relies on the relevant provisions of the IPC to urge that the Complaint was lodged and the Chargesheet was filed for mala fide reasons and that the Criminal Case should be quashed since none of the offences mentioned in the Chargesheet have been made out.

7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State relies on the Complaint and urges that a detailed enquiry would be required to establish the facts stated in the Complaint as well as in the Chargesheet. The APP also relies on the admission of the petitioner as recorded in the Chargesheet which records that the petitioner voluntarily came to the Police Station at Domalguda on 22.05.2024, admitted his guilt with regard to the offence and assured his co-operation with the investigating authority before LW.6, Sub-Inspector of Police, Domalguda P.S.

8. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent-State.

9. C.C.No.80 of 2025 has been filed against the petitioner on the basis of the offences under sections 171(H) and 188 of the IPC. Section 171(H) of the IPC deals with the offence of ‘Illegal payments in connection with an election’ and elaborates that incurring or authorising expenses on account of holding any public meeting or similar activity for promoting/procuring the election of a candidate, without the general or special authority in writing of such candidate, shall be punished with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees. Section 171(H) of the IPC contemplates illegal payment in conn