The complaint of election code violation registered against BJP national president J.P. Nadda during the Assembly election campaign is a classic instance of ‘reckless registration of a crime,’ said the High Court of Karnataka.
“The complaint is so vague that it would daunt vagueness itself. On such a vague complaint, a case was registered and the Damocles’ sword was left hanging on the petitioner projecting it to be an offence,” the court observed.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna made these observations in a recent order allowing a petition filed by Mr. Nadda. The BJP national president had questioned the legality of registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against him by the Harappanahalli police in Vijayanagar district in May this year.
An officer of the Election Commission of India flying squad had lodged the complaint alleging that Mr. Nadda had indulged in undue influencing and threatening of electors while addressing an election rally at Harappanahalli.
However, the court on examining the contents of the complaint, pointed out that the narration in the complaint itself nowhere makes out any offence against the petitioner that would become punishable under Section 171F of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for indulging in undue influence and personation at an election.
For an incident to become an offence under Section 171F of IPC, the minimum requirement is narration in the complaint of the ingredients of undue influence or personation, but the complaint is so vague that it would daunt vagueness itself, the court pointed out.
If further investigation is permitted to continue on such a complaint against the petitioner, it would become ‘a classic case of permitting investigation in a reckless registration of crime which on the face of it, would become an abuse of the process of law,’ the court said while quashing the FIR.
