Bengaluru: Karnataka high court recently quashed the proceedings in an extortion case registered in relation to the electoral bonds issue against Nalin Kumar Kateel, former president of BJP state unit.
In his order, Justice M Nagaprasanna stated that the complainant is not only unrelated to the transactions (electoral bonds) but also has no locus to maintain an extortion plaint.
The complaint was filed by Adarsh R Iyer, a Bengaluru-based RTI activist. Union finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman and the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) are among the other accused named in the complaint, filed earlier this year.
"The Supreme Court has held that when allegations made in the FIR don't constitute a prima facie offence, such crime should be nipped in the bud. In the case at hand, there isn't even a modicum of ingredients of the offence made out, even in the prima facie sense. What the complainant projects is huge hocus-pocus, but alas, he has no locus. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to exercise my jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC and annihilate the crime so registered against the petitioner/accused," Justice M Nagaprasanna observed in his order.
After perusing the provisions of law, he noted that Sections 383 and 384 of IPC pertaining to extortion are person-specific, which would mean they can be alleged only by the aggrieved person. "It's not public-specific. For illustration, if a person is assaulted and has suffered injury, a stranger/neighbour can' lodge a complaint over it. The person who has suffered the assault should necessarily be the complainant. If he chooses not to register a complaint for reasons best known to him, a stranger can't complain a stranger has been assaulted and he is the victim," the judge added.
"Therefore, I have no hesitation in holding that the complaint suffers from want of locus to register the complaint... The magistrate who referred the matter for investigation in terms of his order supra doesn't advert to this issue. Merely because the complainant... projects alleged extortion, the magistrate cannot become a rubber stamp... without application of mind to relevant statutory provisions. Therefore, the complainant is an alien to the transaction, and an alien cannot complain of extortion," Justice Nagaprasanna observed while allowing the petition.