Supreme Court Quashes Election Inquiry Due to Lack of Justification Under Section 340 CrPC

The Supreme Court of India has quashed an order directing an inquiry under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in an election dispute case involving Shri Kailash Vijayvargiya and Antar Singh Darbar. The Court found that the High Court had failed to establish the necessary satisfaction required to initiate such an inquiry.

Background of the Case

The case arose from an election petition where the High Court directed an inquiry under Section 340 CrPC against the appellant, Kailash Vijayvargiya, over alleged discrepancies in affidavit submissions. The order stated:

“Looking to the allegations made in the application, it is apparent that a brief inquiry is necessary as provided by Section 195 of CrPC.”

The High Court directed the separation of the disputed affidavit and its placement under the custody of the Principal Registrar for further investigation.

Arguments by the Appellant

Kailash Vijayvargiya challenged the order, arguing:

• The High Court had not provided sufficient justification for initiating an inquiry under Section 340 CrPC.
• The standard of satisfaction required before directing an inquiry was not met.
• The alleged discrepancies did not constitute sufficient grounds for initiating criminal proceedings.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court examined the High Court’s order and ruled:

“We are afraid, there is no satisfaction as warranted under Section 340 of CrPC to initiate a preliminary inquiry.”

The Court referred to its earlier ruling in Amarsang Nathaji v. Hardik Harshadbhai Patel, (2017) 1 SCC 113, which held:

“Even after the emergence of a contradictory statement, the court must form an opinion that it is expedient in the interests of justice to initiate an inquiry into the offences of false evidence and offences against public justice.”

The Court emphasized that merely finding discrepancies in an affidavit does not automatically justify prosecution under Sections 199 and 200 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Final Judgment

• The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order directing an inquiry under Section 340 CrPC.
• The matter was remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration following legal principles.
• The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Conclusion

This ruling underscores the requirement for judicial satisfaction before initiating criminal inquiries in election-related cases. The judgment reinforces the principle that courts must carefully assess whether an inquiry serves the interests of justice before invoking Section 340 CrPC.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Shri Kailash Vijayva vs Antar Singh Darbar & Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 12-01-2017.pdf