Criminal proceedings under Section 188 IPC require a promulgated order and a complaint under Section 195 CrPC; similarly, charges under Sections 171F and 171H IPC require specific evidence of undue influence or unauthorized election expenditure, which mere organization of a celebratory meeting does not satisfy.

By the Court:-

1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the charge sheet no. 01 of 2024 and order dated 03.07.2024 by which cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 171F, 171H and 188/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat, as well as the order dated 17.12.2025 by which a petition under Section 258 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners has been dismissed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat; all in connection with Bermo P.S. Case No. 60 of 2024, corresponding to G.R. No. 385 of 2024.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner no.1 is the principal of Saraswati Shishu Vidya Mandir and he organized a meeting in violation of the Model Code of Conduct for the 2024 Lok Sabha Election without obtaining permission from the competent authority in the school hall and the petitioner no.2 posted on his social media account about holding of a meeting on 14.04.2024 without obtaining permission.

4. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant- Manoj Kumar Bediya who was Assistant Engineer-cum-Flying Squad Officer, police registered Bermo P.S. Case No. 60 of 2024 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of investigation police found the allegation against the petitioners to be true and submitted charge sheet and basing upon the same, the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat has taken cognizance of the offences as already indicated above and also rejected the petition for discharge of the petitioners.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners by relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. Nishikant Dubey vs. The State of Jharkhand and allied cases reported in 2024:JHHC:1622 that in that case, this Court relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Patna High Court Dharmesh Prasad Verma vs. The State of Bihar reported in (2016) SCC OnLine Pat 3622 wherein, it was held that it would not be within the domain of the police to register a case for an offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code and investigate the same after registration of an FIR for an offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since no complaint has been filed so cognizance ought not have been taken by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in respect of the offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners next relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Prakash Jha vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. dated 31.07.2017 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 43543 of 2010 and submits that therein also the Hon’ble Patna High Court had the occasion to consider the provisions of Sections 171F , 171H and 188/34 of the Indian Penal Code and finding that no offence punishable under the penal provisions of law was made out, quashed the entire criminal proceeding. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that even if the entire allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety, still, none of the offences in respect of which cognizance has been taken by the