Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 16696 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 15.11.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 16696 of 2019

and Crl.M.P.(MD) No. 9897 of 2019

1. Thanuskodi

2. Ramaraj

... Petitioners/Accused Nos.2&4/

Accused Nos.2&4

Vs.

1. The Inspector of Police,

Seittur Police Station,

Virudhunagar District,

In Crime No. 84 of 2014.

... 1^st Respondent/Complainant/

Complainant

2. K. Meenakshi

... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant/

Defacto Complainant

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C, to call for the records pursuant to the charge sheet in STC

No. 2191 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Srivilliputtur in Crime No. 84 of 2014 on the file of the Inspector

of Police, Seittur Police Station, Virudhunagar District and quash

the same as far as the petitioner is concerned.

For Petitioners

: Mr. R. Ragavendran

For Respondent-1

: Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi

Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the

charge sheet in STC No. 2191 of 2019 on the file of the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputtur in Crime No. 84 of 2014 on

the file of the Inspector of Police, Seittur Police Station,

Virudhunagar District and quash the same as against the petitioner.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners was

doing election campaign at 00.20 to 00.35 hrs in Jakkineri village

and the election campaign by violating the Election Code of conduct.

On the basis of the above said allegations, the respondent police

registered the complaint and filed a charge sheet against these

petitioners for the offences under Sections 136 Representation of

People Act 1950 r/w 188 of IPC in Crime No. 84 of 2014 the same was

taken cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Srivilliputtur. The said criminal proceedings is under challenge in

this Criminal Original Petition.

1/4

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 16696 of 2019

3. According to the petitioner, the petitioners are innocents.

According to Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., no Court can take

cognizance of an offence under Section 188 of IPC, unless the public

servant has written order from the authority. Further he submitted

that the after obtaining permission from the electoral officer the

petitioners and others were went to election campaign and hence, the

allegation regarding violating the election code of conduct is false

and baseless. On precautionary measures, the respondent police had

registered this case as against the petitioners. Therefore, they

sought for quashing the proceeding.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) submitted that the

petitioners have violated the election code of conduct and there are

specific allegations as against the petitioners to proceed with the

trial. Further, he would submit that Section 188 of IPC is a

cognizable offence and therefore it is the duty of the police to

register a case. Though there is a bar under Section 195(a)(i) of

Cr.P.C. to take cognizance for the offence under Section 188 of IPC,

it does not mean that the police cannot register FIR and investigate

the case. Therefore, he vehemently opposed the quash petition and

prayed for dismissal of the same.

5. Perused the material documents available on record.

6. On perusal of the charge, it is seen that the petitioners

have violated the election code of conduct. Therefore, the

respondent police levelled the charges under Sections 136

Representation of People Act 1950 r/w 188 of IPC as against the

petitioners. Except the official witnesses, no one has spoken about

the occurrence and no one was examined to substantiate the charges

against the petitioners. It is also seen from the charge itself

that the charges are very simple in nature and trivial. Section 188

reads as fo