Supreme Court clarifies legal route for complaints against elected candidates

The Supreme Court held that private citizens can file criminal complaints against elected candidates for allegedly furnishing false information or concealing material facts in election affidavits. However, it declined to revive proceedings against Karnataka MLA Shailendra Beldale in the case

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday held that private citizens can file criminal complaints against elected candidates for furnishing false information or concealing material facts in election affidavits under the Representation of the People (RoP) Act.

The court said the restriction under Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) would not prevent the filing of complaints in such cases.

---

Section 195 of the CrPC restricts criminal courts from taking cognisance of certain offences unless a written complaint is filed by the authorised public servant or the concerned court.

“We hold that a private complaint alleging an offence under Section 125A of the RoP Act need not pass muster of the rigours of Section 195 CrPC as held by the High Court.

“If a complaint is lodged to harass an elected candidate or frivolous allegations are levelled, the laws of the country duly equip and empower the competent magistrates to pass such orders as they deem fit and proper, commensurate with the facts and circumstances of each case,” a bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu said.

Section 125A of the RoP Act penalises candidates for providing false information, concealing details or failing to make mandatory disclosures in their nomination papers or accompanying affidavits.

The judgment was delivered while disposing of an appeal filed by Rajkumar Madki against a Karnataka High Court judgment dated March 7, 2025, which had quashed his criminal complaint against Shailendra Beldale, an elected member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from the Bidar constituency.

Madki had alleged that Beldale furnished a false declaration about his residential address in an affidavit accompanying his nomination papers for the 2023 Assembly election.

He had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Bengaluru, alleging an offence punishable under Section 125A of the RoP Act.

The Karnataka High Court had quashed the complaint, holding that proceedings for the alleged offence could be initiated only through a complaint by the Election Commission. It had said a voter could pursue an election petition instead of filing a private criminal complaint.

“The legislature is presumed to be conscious of its insertion of Section 125A in the RoP Act four years back,” the judgment said, adding that the omission of Section 125A from Section 195 must be treated as deliberate.

The verdict further held that the absence of any other statutory provision restricting the filing of such complaints to public servants, coupled with the wording of Section 125A of the RoP Act, supported the conclusion that private criminal complaints were legally maintainable.

However, despite settling the legal question in favour of the maintainability of private complaints, the Supreme Court declined to revive the proceedings against Beldale.