Back
Quashes FIR Against MLA Rahim Khan For 2-Minute Loudspeaker Overrun
A Matter of Minutes: Court Rules 120 Seconds Too Trivial for an Offence
In a decision that underscores the boundaries of criminal prosecution for minor administrative breaches, the has quashed an FIR registered against Bidar Congress MLA Rahim Khan. The dispute arose from an allegation that Khan continued using a loudspeaker for election campaigning exactly two minutes—or 120 seconds—past the 10 PM curfew imposed on such publicity during the 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly elections.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the single-judge bench, held that a two-minute discrepancy, especially in the absence of a standardised clock, cannot blossom into a criminal offence.
The Case of the Missing Clock
On , Veeresh, a flying squad officer deployed for election duty, lodged a complaint at the . He claimed that Rahim Khan, along with others, continued to broadcast election propaganda through a loudspeaker until 10:02 PM, despite the permissible deadline being 10 PM. This led to the registration of Crime No. 40/2023 for offences under Sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 290 (public nuisance) read with Section 149 (common object) of the , and .
The flying squad's watch showed 10:02 PM; Khan's watch showed precisely 10 PM. No external timekeeping device was referenced.
Arguments at the Bar
Senior counsel , appearing for the petitioner, contended that the difference of two minutes—'120 seconds' in his words—was and incapable of supporting any criminal charge. He emphasised that there was no 'standard clock' prescribed by law to determine the exact cut-off, making the allegation .
The Additional State Public Prosecutor, , argued on behalf of the respondent-State that the petitioner's compliance with time limits was a seriously disputed question of fact. He insisted that the court could not quash proceedings at the threshold without a trial.
Legal Analysis: The Bhajan Lal Touchstone
The High Court applied the seminal principles laid down by the in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335). Justice Nagaprasanna observed that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not constitute any offence. The court specifically noted:
“If it were to be beyond 10, 15 or 20 minutes, then there would have been some semblance of allegation. 120 seconds in which clock, is not indicated. Therefore, there cannot be an offence of the kind that is projected by the flying squad.”
The judge further remarked on the absurdity of the allegation: “Two minutes in what, which is the standard clock that is seen, is not even indicated. According to the flying squad, it is two minutes. According to the petitioner, it was only 10 p.m. For two minutes, a crime is registered on this disputed question of fact.”
The court categorised the case under the fifth category of Bhajan Lal —where allegations are so absurd and that no prudent person can reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
The Verdict
Allowing the criminal petition, Justice Nagaprasanna quashed the proceedings in Crime No. 40/2023 pending before the , the petitioner Rahim Khan. The order brings to an end a prosecution that hinged on a time lapse that could not be reliably measured.
The ruling serves as a reminder that criminal law is not meant to police trivial, unresolvable factual disputes, especially where the alleged infraction is measured in seconds without a common reference point. For election officials and campaigners alike, the judgment draws a pragmatic line between genuine regulatory compliance and overly zealous enforcement.
