Supreme Court: Voters can file private complaints for false election affidavits

This case concerns whether a private individual (voter) can file a criminal complaint against an elected candidate for making false disclosures in their election affidavit under Section 125-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, or if such complaints are restricted to public servants under Section 195(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Who it concerns: Appellant: Sri. Rajkumar Madki; Respondent: Dr. Shaileendra Beldale (Member of Karnataka Legislative Assembly); Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu.

What the court decided

• The Court held that a private person can file a complaint under Section 200 of the Cr. PC for an offence under Section 125-A of the RoP Act, as Section 195(1) of the Cr. PC does not bar such private complaints.
• The Court found that the High Court was in error in holding that only the Election Commission or a public servant could file such complaints.
• The Court upheld the High Court's decision to quash the specific complaint in this case, but on different grounds: the allegation of false residence declaration was effectively rebutted by the respondent, making conviction remote and further proceedings futile.
• The appeal was disposed of, and parties were directed to bear their own costs.

Also in the document

• The Court noted that Section 125-A of the RoP Act was inserted in 2002, and Section 195 of the Cr. PC was amended in 2006 without including Section 125-A, indicating a deliberate legislative omission to restrict private complaints.
• The Court stated that guidelines or press notes issued by the Election Commission do not bind the Court in the interpretation of statutes.
• The Court observed that the possibility of conviction in the specific case was remote due to the nature of documents on record.