Court rules no prima facie evidence for charges under Representation of the People Act and Indian Penal Code; affirms Model Code of Conduct breach alone does not constitute a criminal offence.
In a significant legal decision, the Telangana High Court on June 29, 2026, quashed criminal proceedings against P. Mohammed Iliyas, a government teacher accused of disseminating derogatory social media posts during the election period, thereby violating the Model Code of Conduct. Justice N. Tukaramji presided over the case, which challenged the charges under Section 129 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and Sections 171C and 505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner, P. Mohammed Iliyas, was accused of posting derogatory comments on Facebook against the people of Alampur and a political candidate during the Telangana Legislative Assembly elections in 2023. The prosecution alleged that these posts were made when the Model Code of Conduct was in force, aiming to influence the electoral atmosphere negatively.
Justice Tukaramji meticulously analyzed whether the allegations, even if accepted at face value, constituted the offenses charged. He noted that Section 129 of the Representation of the People Act applies solely to individuals performing duties related to elections, such as election officers and clerks. As Iliyas was not engaged in any official election duty, his status as a government teacher did not attract liability under this provision.
Furthermore, the court examined the charge of undue influence under Section 171C IPC, which necessitates coercion or intimidation affecting electoral freedom. The judge found no evidence that Iliyas employed threats or unlawful pressure on voters, and thus, the offense was not substantiated.
Regarding the charge under Section 505(1)(b) IPC, which involves statements made to incite public disorder, the court determined there was no material indicating the social media posts intended to disturb public tranquility or incite offenses against the state. The posts, while politically critical, did not meet the threshold for criminal liability under this section.
Justice Tukaramji emphasized that the Model Code of Conduct is a set of guidelines rather than statutory law and does not, by itself, create substantive penal offenses. In the absence of specific statutory provisions prescribing penal consequences, mere violation of the Code does not constitute a criminal act.
The court invoked its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), to prevent abuse of legal processes and ensure justice. Citing precedents, including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the judge concluded that the proceedings lacked merit and were motivated by mala fides, warranting quashing.
The ruling underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding individuals from unwarranted legal harassment while reinforcing the principle that penal statutes must be strictly construed. The decision is expected to provide clarity on the application of election-related laws and the limits of criminal liability concerning political expression during election periods.
Bottom line:-
Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) - Alleged offences under Section 129 of the Representation of the People Act, Section 171C IPC, and Section 505(1)(b) IPC - No prima facie material to establish essential ingredients of the offences - Model Code of Conduct violation alone does not constitute a criminal offence - Proceedings quashed to prevent abuse of process of law.
Statutory provision(s): Section 129 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 171C IPC, Section 505(1)(b) IPC, Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023).
P. Mohammed Iliyas v. State of Telangana, (Telangana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2938083
