Court rules that a two-minute extension beyond the prescribed time limit during an election campaign does not constitute a cognizable offense.
In a significant decision, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, has quashed the FIR filed against Rahim Khan, an elected Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) for allegedly using a loudspeaker beyond the permissible time during an election campaign. The case, which revolved around an alleged two-minute overuse of loudspeakers, was deemed by the court as insufficient to constitute a cognizable offense.
The petitioner, Rahim Khan, had been accused of using a loudspeaker until 10:02 p.m. during an election rally on May 5, 2023, whereas the permissible time limit was until 10:00 p.m. The charges were registered under Sections 143, 147, 290 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 109 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The FIR was filed following a complaint by a member of the flying squad tasked with monitoring election activities.
During the proceedings, Khan's counsel, Sri Naveed Ahmed, argued that the alleged time violation was based on a discrepancy between the complainant's clock and the petitioner's watch, with no standard time reference provided. He contended that such minor discrepancies should not be criminalized, especially in the absence of a standard clock, which is crucial for validating the exact time of the alleged offense.
The High Court, referencing the landmark Supreme Court judgment in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, highlighted that allegations, even if assumed true, did not constitute a cognizable offense. Justice Nagaprasanna pointed out that without a standard clock reference, the two-minute extension could not substantiate the registration of a crime.
The court emphasized that the parameters set by the Supreme Court for quashing FIRs under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code were applicable in this case. It stated that the allegations were insufficient to justify the continuation of the proceedings and that registering a crime based on such a minor and disputable issue was not appropriate.
Consequently, the court ordered the quashing of the FIR and the ongoing proceedings in Crime No.40/2023 before the Additional JMFC II Court, Bidar District, against Rahim Khan. This decision underscores the necessity of concrete evidence and the importance of standardization in time-related allegations, particularly in sensitive contexts like election campaigns.
Bottom Line :
Continuation of loudspeaker usage beyond prescribed time limit by two minutes during election campaign does not constitute a cognizable offence, particularly when no standard clock is indicated.
Statutory provision(s):
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 143, 147, 290 read with Section 149
- Karnataka Police Act, 1963: Section 109
- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 482
Rahim Khan v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2969105
