NISHANT DESHDIPAK VARMA V. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

SCA/4669/2014

AI Insights

The case revolves around a petition by Nishant Deshdipak Varma, a member of the Aam Aadmi Party, who alleged that Vodafone India sent SMSs to voters in Gujarat that amounted to electoral bribery, influencing voters in favor of the BJP during the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. The petitioner argued that these actions violated the Model Code of Conduct and constituted offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Representation of the People Act. The Election Commission and Vodafone contested these claims, leading to an investigation. The court's decision was based on the findings of this investigation, which concluded that the SMSs were part of a legitimate contest and did not constitute bribery or a violation of electoral laws.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726735 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-04-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Constitution of India, 1950, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Representation of People Act, 1951
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: PERCY KAVINA; BIREN VAISHNAV
• Assessee Lawyers: BHARAT RAO; K R KOSHTI
• Keywords: Bribery; Election Commission; Model Code of Conduct; Telecom Service Provider; SMS Broadcast
• Section: 123; 171B

Judgement Text

"C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4669 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== NISHANT DESHDIPAK VARMA....Petitioner(s) Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & 1....Respondent(s) ====================================== Appearance: MR BHARAT T RAO, ADVOCATE with MR KR KOSHTI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PERCY KAVINA, Sr. ADVOCATE with MR BIREN A VAISHNAV for the Respondents ====================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA Date : 07/04/2014 Page 1 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT CAV JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, claiming to be the Member of AAM Admi Party, has prayed for the following reliefs; (A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent authorities to take appropriate steps including filing of criminal complaint for the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.; (B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondent no. 1-Election Commission to ban and seal all activities of the Telecom Service Provider in general and in particular Vodafone Telecom Service Provider or Vodafone India Service Pvt. Ltd. of Vodafone Gujarat from providing any assistance into the election propaganda or canvassing in any manner; (C) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to seal all electronic equipments which are, were or are likely to be utilized for SMS broadcast method, till the elections are conducted i.e. upto 12/05/2014, in the interest of justice; Page 2 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT 2. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that under the Constitution of India and the Representation of the People Act, the Election Commission has been instructed to see that the election of the Parliament i.e. House of People or State Legislature is held and conducted in a free, fair and impartial manner. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the Election Commission is the only authority to supervise, control and conduct the election of the Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the constitutional duty and obligation imposed on the Election Commissioner is to fulfill the aforesaid obligations. 2.1. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as per the Model Code of Conduct for the Guidance of the Political Parties and Candidates and/or Political Party, after announcement of the election and until the completion of the process of election, no candidate and/or any political party shall indulge into inducement, financial or otherwise and shall not induce an offer to the voter, financial or otherwise. It is further submitted that as per the said guidelines, activities which are corrupt practices or electoral offences such as bribery, undue influence, intimidation of voters, personation, canvassing within 100 meters of a polling station, holding of public meetings during the period of 48 hours ending with the hour fixed for the close of the poll and conveyance of voters to and from polling stations are prohibited. 2.2. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that pursuant to the interim order passed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court Page 3 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT relating to the advertisement of political nature on TV Channel and cable networks, the Election Commission has issued instructions and has directed that the pre-viewing, scrutinizing and certifying advertisements to be telecasted over TV channels and cable networks by any candidate contesting election from the constituency concerned, the Returning Officer of the Parliamentary Constituency is designated as the Designated Officer and the concerned applicants are required to submit two copies of the proposed advertisement in electronic form alongwith an attested transcript thereof and before any advertisement of political nature is telecasted in TV Channels, cable network and/or in electronic media, the application for certification is required to be submitted before the Committee concerned or the Designated Officer concerned in a statement as per the format prescribed and the certificate of telecast for an advertisement is to be given by the Committee/Designated Officer in the format. 2.3. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the Election Commission of India has issued instructions/communication dated 25/10/2013 to the Chief Electoral Officers of all States and Union Territories and the Presidents/General Secretaries of all National/State recognized Political Parties with respect to use of social media in election campaigning in the interest of transparency and level playing field in the elections. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as per the said communication dated 25/10/2013 before using social media in election campaigning, candidates are required to file affidavits in Form-26 at the time of filing of nominations. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as per the aforesaid instructions, media certification and monitoring committees at Page 4 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT District and State levels are given the responsibilities of pre- certification of such advertisement alongwith other functions viz. acting against paid news etc. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that it is also clarified in the said communication that since social media websites are also electronic media by definition, these instructions of the Commission contained in its order dated 15/04/2004 shall also apply mutatis mutandis to websites including social media websites and shall fall under the purview of pre-certification. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the Election Commission has also directed the concerned Chief Electoral Officer/President/General Secretaries that the respective political parties should ensure that no political advertisements are released to any INTERNET based media/websites, including social media websites, by political parties/candidates without pre-certification from competent authorities in the same format. 2.4. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as per Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code whoever gives a gratification to any person with the object of inducing him or any other person to exercise any electoral right or of rewarding any person for having exercised any such right or accepts either for himself or for any other person any gratification as a reward for exercising any such right or for inducing or attempting to induce any other person to exercise any such right is said to have committed the offence of ‘bribery’ and is liable for punishment/imprisonment for one year, or fine, or both. 2.5. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as per Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 any Page 5 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT gift, offer or promise by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent of any gratification, to any person whomsoever, with the object, directly or indirectly of inducing an elector to vote or refrain from voting at an election, or as a reward to an elector for having voted or refrained from voting relates to ‘bribery’. 2.6. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner, so pleaded in the petition, that the petitioner on his mobile number 9979892294 has received SMS from VG-611112 (Vodafone Service Provider) on 06/03/2014 containing the message that, “2014 Election ma BJP na PM pad na umedvar ....(A) Narendra Modi (B ) Rajnath Singh, SMS Karo (A) or (B) to 567899 @ Rs.5/- SMS. Aapnu gyan aapne jitadi shake chhe Rs.10 lakhs”. 2.7. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that on making the inquiry of the aforesaid SMS, he came to know that ‘VG- 611112’ is an abbreviation of Vodafone Gujarat and through this ID they sent the bulk SMSs to their subscribers in Gujarat. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that there are approximately 1.5 Crore subscribers only in the State of Gujarat whereas the number of subscribers throughout India is many a times more than the aforesaid figures of subscribers existing in the State of Gujarat. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid action and conduct is absolutely a calculated action to influence the voters and to create an impression in the mind of literate and illiterate voters that there is going to be a Prime Minister either Narendra Modi or Rajnath Singh and none else and by such conduct of sending SMSs to subscribers by the said Telecom Service Provider is clearly an act of hindrance and obstruction in holding the free, Page 6 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT fair and impartial election of Lok Sabha, 2014 by giving an indication as if Prime Minister will be of Bharatiya Janta Party and is either Narendra Modi or Rajnath Singh. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid action and conduct is apparently a breach of constitutional provisions contained in Article 75(1) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Model Code of Conduct issued by the Election Commission from time to time. 2.8. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as the petitioner knows that the Income-tax Department has raised a demand of Rs.8500 Corers from Vodafone Transfer Pricing of sale of its call centers and assignment of call option and such dispute of income-tax liability is subjudice before Hon’ble the Supreme Court, it has a reasonable apprehension that it is an underlying object of Vodafone Telecom Service Provider in India to show their grace and leaning towards the Bharatiya Janta Party and/or Narendra Modi or Rajnath Singh. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid action and conduct as apprehended by the petitioner, since the petitioner has reason to believe that vested interest are systematically attempted to influence the voters, literate and illiterate by professing to select the Prime Ministership office either from these two named dignitaries, as if it is only the Bharatiya Janta Party is going to secure the majority in House of People in ensuing Election, 2014, clearly indicates and shows that the ensuing House of People Election is attempted to be conducted in an unfair, unfree, bias and partial manner. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the Election Commission has to ensure and has to see to it that nobody indulges into any corrupt practice directly or indirectly and, therefore, Page 7 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT immediately upon receiving the aforesaid SMS on 11/03/2014, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the respondents, which is at (Annexure -B) to the petition, bringing it to the notice of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State and other authorities with respect to the aforesaid SMS received as publicity material of Bharatiya Janta Party in Gujarat giving publicity to Narendra Modi by awarding a cash price worth Rs.10 lakhs. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that by the aforesaid complaint, the petitioner requested the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State to consider the correspondence and such activities by Bharatiya Janta Party as election campaigning in their election budgets for the run up of 2014 General Elections and to verify if such promotional schemes/modus operandi are valid under the Model Code of Conduct, as prescribed by the Election Commission of India and if not, then appropriate action be taken including de-recognizing Bhartiya Janta Party as a political party, if they are found guilty of overruling Election Commission of India under the prescribed Rules and if the same is considered as bribing the voters in any manner. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that thereafter petitioner had again submitted one another written representation/complaint dated 16/03/2014 submitting that it is a serious offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. 2.9. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that despite the aforesaid written representations/complaints, respondent no. 2 did not look into the complaints made by the petitioner though persuaded constantly and continuously. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that on 19/03/2014 the petitioner had personally solicited respondent no. 2-Chief Electoral Officer, Page 8 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Gujarat State and had made the submissions. However, nothing was done from the office of the Chief Electoral Office, Gujarat State. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that thereafter on 21/03/2014 the petitioner received communication on E-Mail intimating him that MCC Nodal Officer (SMS) has been instructed to direct Vodafone to remove all questions related to politics, candidates, political parties, political functionaries from their quiz forthwith and the Company has also been warned that if there is any violation of Model Code of Conduct, necessary action shall be taken. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that according to the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State the aforesaid communication is an interim reply and the petitioner has been communicated that they are looking into the details and issues are yet to be decided. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that thereafter nothing has been done on the representations/complaints made by the petitioner and no action has been taken on the complaints made by the petitioner under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 123 of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 and, therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the aforesaid reliefs. 3. Shri Bharat Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has vehemently submitted that the SMS sent by the Vodafone Service Provider is nothing but a publicity by a political party i.e. Bharatiya Janta Party. Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has further submitted that the contents of the SMS dated 06/03/2014 is nothing but to induce the voter and offering Rs.10 lakhs is also Page 9 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT nothing but an attempt to induce and bribe the voter, which amounts to the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code as well as ‘bribery’ under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that as such the duty is cast upon the office of the Chief Electoral Officer to inquire into the matter and/or investigate the matter and thereafter take its own decision independently. In the present case, the investigation/inquiry was entrusted to another Officer i.e. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone I, Ahmedabad City and on the basis of the report submitted by the said Police Officer, Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat has not taken any further action and has not filed any complaint against the concerned person/political party for the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code and, therefore, it is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as such the respondents have failed to perform its statutory duty cast upon it in ensuring that there is a free, fair and impartial election. It is further submitted that in the communication dated 21/03/2014 it was stated that the same is an interim reply. However, thereafter no further reply has been sent to the petitioner on conclusion of the inquiry/investigation of the complaints made by the petitioner. 3.1. It is further submitted by Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the contents of the SMS dated 06/03/2014 and the offer of Rs.10 lakhs as a price in the quiz contest is an attempt to influence the electorate and the voters. The aforesaid is clearly an offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code, which means to indulge into corrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123 of the Page 10 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Representation of the People Act, 1951 and, therefore, appropriate steps for such breach and violation of the provisions of the Act and the breach of Model Code of Conduct and the flagrant violation in professing control to constitutional scheme of appointment of Prime Minister deserves to be quashed and set aside and the concerned political parties deserves to be directed by the Election Commission from professing such propaganda in influencing the voters and obstructing the ways and means of conducting the election in free and impartial manner. 3.2. Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has vehemently submitted that as per the communication dated 21/03/2014 from the Under Secretary, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, State of Gujarat on the E- Mail complaint dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014 of the petitioner, the MCC Nodal Officer (SMS) has been instructed to direct Vodafone to remove all the questions related to politics, candidates, political parties, political functionaries from their quiz forthwith and the Vodafone Company is being warned that if there is any violation of Model Code of Conduct, Election Commission will take necessary action, which means, the Election Commission has found substance in the allegation made by the petitioner in the complaints dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014. It is submitted that therefore when the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State has found substance in the allegations made by the petitioner in the complaints dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014, the Election Commission is bound to and is required to file a criminal complaint against the concerned political party, Bharatiya Janta Party at whose instances the aforesaid SMS is sent by the Page 11 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Service Provider (Vodafone) for offence punishable under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that as the respondents have failed to perform its statutory duty and has failed to file any criminal complaint for the offence punishable under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, it is requested to allow the present Special Civil Application and grant the reliefs in terms of paragraph nos. 19(B) and (C) as prayed for with a view to see that the Election of 2014 is conducted in an absolute free, fair and impartial manner. 4. On an advance copy being served upon the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, more particularly, Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State, Shri Percy Kavina, learned Counsel has appeared with Shri Biren Vaishnav, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents. An affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the respondents. 4.1. Shri Percy Kavina, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that as such the complaints given by the petitioner dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014 have been attended and looked into by the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State and the allegations made in the said complaints are inquired into and investigated and on inquiry it has been found that there is no substance in the allegations made by the petitioner. It is submitted that as such after the inquiry was concluded and the petitioner could be further replied, the petitioner has approached this Court and has preferred the Page 12 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT present Special Civil Application and, therefore, the petitioner could not be communicated the final reply. 4.2. It is submitted by Shri Kavina, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that after the petitioner made an online complaint to the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer dated 11/03/2014 contending that the SMS contest given by the Vodafone were violating the Model Code of Conduct, the Chief Electoral Officer wrote a letter to the Nodal Officer (SMS Monitoring), Shri Raghavendra Vasta, Superintendent of Police (Security), CID (Intelligence), Gujarat Sate requesting to sent the report with his comments to the Chief Electoral Officer by 13/03/2014 and based on the inquiry conducted by the Office of the Police Commissioner, Zone I, Ahmedabad, Shri Vasta opined that there was no breach of the Model Code of Conduct. It is submitted that in the process of inquiry, statement of one Shri Tejus Patel, Major (Retired), Circle Nodal & Regulatory Officer, Vodafone West Ltd. was recorded and Shri Patel informed the authority that the SMSs sent was a part of the contest question under the ‘JEETO DUS LAKH CONTEST’ started by the Company on 05/02/2014 and the contest has no connection or funding from the Bharatiya Janta Party nor was intended to promote any party for electoral purposes and apart from the question that the petitioner has received there were questions related to general knowledge and current topics. It is submitted that based on the statement so recorded, the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer on 21/03/2014 on the subject of the complaints made by the petitioner once again wrote to the Nodal Officer to instruct the Vodafone Company to remove all the political questions from their quiz forthwith and warned them that only general knowledge questions and the Page 13 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT questions not relating to politics/candidates/political functionaries/political parties should be used and action would be taken if they are found violating the Model Code of Conduct. It is submitted that the Nodal Officer was further requested to get details of all quiz questions circulated since 05/03/2014 (the date on which the Model Code of Conduct came into operation) and do further inquiry whether it is a case of bribe under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that on the same date, the petitioner was also informed that pursuant to the complaints the Nodal Officer has been instructed to direct Vodafone to remove all the questions related to politics/candidates/political parties/political functionaries and the company is being warned. It is submitted that on the complaints received from the petitioner, as an abundant caution, Vodafone Company was directed to remove all the questions related to politics and the Company as warned. It is submitted that the aforesaid cannot be said to be an admission on the part of the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State that by the aforesaid SMSs and/or quiz contest there is any breach of the Model Code of Conduct. 4.3. It is submitted by Shri Kavina, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that pursuant to the further letter dated 28/03/2014 to the Nodal Officer to send the report, the Nodal Officer has furnished the report to the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State stating that it is found that the contest is not funded by the Bhartiya Janta Party and Vodafone Company is to pay the amount on the basis of the revenue generated by the Company on charging Rupees 5/- per SMS and there is no breach of Model Code of Conduct and the report further stated that no case is made out for commission of the offence under Page 14 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the outcome of the report could not be communicated to the petitioner as the petition was filed in the meanwhile. 4.4. It is submitted by Shri Kavina, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that on inquiry it has been found that no case is made out to take further action, as based on the report, it has been found that there is no breach of the Model Code of Conduct and/or a case which calls for lodging of a Complaint under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. 4.5. It is further submitted by Shri Kavina, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that as such considering the SMS dated 06/03/2014 by no stretch of imagination it can be said that there is an offer of Rs.10 lakhs for voting a particular person/party. It is submitted that the contents of the SMS cannot be said to be within the definition of ‘bribery’ either under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code or under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act. 4.6. It is further submitted by Shri Kavina, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that on inquiry/investigation by the Nodal Officer and as per the reply given by the Vodafone Ltd Service Provider ‘JEETO DUS LAKH CONTEST’ is a quiz contest and the aforesaid amount is paid from the amount generated by receiving the reply at the cost of Rs.5/- per SMS (commercial SMS rate). It is submitted that the procedure for the aforesaid would be that the service provider would provide the details of the contest to the customer via SMS and that question which would be forwarded to customers by Vodafone would enable the customers to Page 15 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT register for this contest. Once the customer is registered for the contest he/she receives a question on a random basis directly from the question bank designed by OnMobile without any manual interference. On successfully replying each question, customer will receive next question and so on via SMS and for each question customer pays Rs.5/- and his scores will be added to his account and on post completion of the contest period as per the terms and conditions defined, highest scorer will be selected for each category of the winners. It is submitted that therefore as the respondents, more particularly, the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State is satisfied on conducting the inquiry/investigation, the allegations made in the complaints dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014 that the aforesaid SMSs/quiz contest is sponsored by the Bharatiya Janta Party and is funded by Bharatiya Janta Party as alleged is found to be absolutely a quiz contest by the Service Provider and there is no violation of the Model Code of Conduct and/or the guidelines and/or instructions by the Election Commission issued from time to time and the respondents are satisfied that the contents of the SMS does not amount to inducing the voter and, therefore, in any case, it cannot be said to be bribery as per Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code and/or under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and, therefore, as such the petitioner is not entitled to any reliefs as prayed for in the present petition. By making the above submissions, it is requested to dismiss the present petition. 5. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. At the outset, it is required to be noted that it is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the Page 16 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT contents of the SMS dated 05/03/2014 signed by the Vodafone Service Provider, which amounts to inducing the voter and/or luring the voters to cast vote in favour of a particular person and/or party and to offer Rs.10 lakhs by the said SMS will tantamount to ‘bribery’ as per Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act and it can be said that the offence has been committed under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid SMS and the contents of the aforesaid SMS dated 06/03/2014 are in breach of Model of Code of Conduct and the guidelines/instructions issued by the Election Commission from time to time. It is also the case on behalf of the petitioner that despite the complaints the respondents have not inquired into the said complaints and have not taken any further steps including filing of the Complaint for the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. Whether the contents of the SMS dated 06/03/2014 would tantamount to inducing and/or luring the voter to cast the vote in favour of a particular person/persons/political party and/or to offer Rs.10 lakhs in the said SMS can be said to be ‘bribery’ to cast the vote in favour of a particular person and thereby any offence has been committed under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code shall be dealt with hereinafter. 5.1. The first grievance made by the petitioner is that despite the two complaints dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014 drawing the attention of the respondents, more particularly, respondent no. 2 with respect to the objectionable SMS dated 06/03/2014 and the contents thereof, the same have not been dealt and/or looked into by the respondents and as such no inquiry/investigation has been conducted by respondent no. 2 Page 17 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT and/or office of respondent no. 2. Respondent no. 2/office of respondent no. 2 has not independently held any inquiry/investigation of the allegations made by the petitioner in the complaints dated 11/03/2014 and 16/03/2014. However, from the affidavit-in-reply and so stated in the affidavit-in-reply it appears that as the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat received online complaint from the petitioner dated 11/03/2014, the office of the Chief Electoral Officer immediately started inquiry/investigation and wrote a letter addressed to the Nodal Officer (SMS Monitoring), Shri Raghavendra Vasta, Superintendent of Police (Security), CID (Intelligence), Gujarat State requesting to send the report with his comments to the Chief Electoral Officer by 13/03/2014 and immediately thereafter Shri Vasta conducted the inquiry and opined that there was no breach of Model Code of Conduct. What steps are taken and how the inquiry is conducted on the complaints made by the petitioner is stated in the affidavit-in- reply in paragraph nos. 2 to 5, which reads as under; “2. I say that the petitioner made an online complaint to the office of the Chief Electoral Officer on 11/03/2014 contending that the SMS contest questions generated by the Vodafone Company were violating the Model Code of Conduct. Pursuant to the receipt of the complaint from the petitioner, the office of the Chief Electoral Officer addressed a letter to the Nodal Officer (SMS Monitoring) Shri Raghavendra Vatsa, Superintendent of Police (Security), CID (Intelligence), Gujarat State requesting to send a report with his comments to the CEO by 13/03/2014. Page 18 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT 3. I say that Shri Vatsa, based on the Inquiry conducted by the Office of the Police Commissioner Zone-I, Ahmedabad City, opined that there was no breach of the Model Code of Conduct. In the process of the Inquiry statement of one Shri Tejus Patel, Major (Retd.), Circle Nodal & Regulatory Officer, Vodafone West Limited was recorded and Shri Patel informed the authority that the SMSs sent was a part of the contest question under the ‘JEETO DUS LAKH CONTEST’ started by the company on 05/02/2014. The contest has no connection or funding from B.J.P nor was intended to promote any party for electoral purposes and apart from the question that the petitioner had received there were questions related to general knowledge and current topics. 4. I say that based on the statement so recorded, the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer on 21/03/2014, on the subject of the complaint made by the petitioner once again wrote to the Nodal Officer to instruct the Vodafone Company to remove all political questions from their quiz, forthwith and warn them that only general knowledge questions not relating to politics/candidates/political functionaries/political parties should be used and action would be taken if they are found violating the Model Code of Conduct. The Nodal Officer was further requested to get the details of all quiz questions circulated since 05/03/2014 (the date on which the Model Code of Conduct came into operation) and do further inquiry whether it is a case of bribe under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. On the same date, the Page 19 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT petitioner was also informed that, pursuant to his complaint the Nodal Officer has been instructed to direct Vodafone to all questions related to politics/candidates/political parties/political functionaries and that the company is being warned. I say that the Nodal Officer, on the same day instructed the Deputy Commissioner of Police Zone-I, Ahmedabad City to conduct inquiry on the lines as instructed in the letter of the CEO dated 21/03/2014 and furnish a report. 5. I say that pursuant to the further letter dated 28/03/2014 to the Nodal Officer to send the report, the Nodal Officer has furnished a report to the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer Gujarat State stating that it is found that the contest is not funded by the B.J.P. The Vodafone Company is to pay the amount on the basis of the revenue generated by the company on charging Rupees 5/- per SMS and there is no breach of the Model Code of Conduct and the report further stated that no case is made out for commission of an offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. I say that the copy of the report dated 28/03/2014 together with the contemporaneous documents is placed on record as ANNEXURE RR/I to this Affidavit.” 5.2. Thus from the aforesaid, it cannot be said that no inquiry and/or investigation has been conducted by the office of respondent no. 2–Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State on the complaints made by the petitioner. Merely because the Nodal Officer conducted the inquiry through the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone I and thereafter he sent the Page 20 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT report to the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, it cannot be said that the office of the Chief Electoral Officer has not looked into the complaints made by the petitioner and/or inquired in to and/or investigated the complaints. 5.3. From the affidavit-in-reply as well as the documents on record, it appears that during the course of the inquiry, the statement of one Shri Tejus Patel, Major (Retd.), Circle Nodal & Regulatory Officer, Vodafone West Limited has been recorded and he was inquired with respect to the quiz contest named ‘JEETO DUS LAKH CONTEST’ and the SMSs sent. The said Officer has explained and stated that the contest has no connection or funding from Bharatiya Janta Party nor was promoted for electoral purposes and apart from the question that the petitioner had received there were questions related to general knowledge and current topics. He has also stated that the said quiz contest is started by the Company on 05/03/2014 i.e. much before the Model Code of Conduct. From the correspondence sent by the Service Provider (Vodafone) they have tried to explain how the said quiz contest works and how the procedure of the aforesaid scheme works, which reads as under; How to participate: Dial 567899 (Browsing Charges FREE Rs.5/- Question) SMS A/B to 567899 (Charges Rs.5/SMS) Mode of promotion of contest: We provide details of contest to customer via SMS with a question which will be forwarded to customers by Vodafone to enable customers to register for this contest. Page 21 of 28 Customer act on enrollment Customer enrolled/ registered Subscriber will be offered series of questions from Question bank (On Mobile) one by one and Customer Can score for winning position with defined charge/ question. Customer C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT How Subscriber will play: Once the customer is registered for the contest: he/she receives a question on a random basis directly from the question bank designed by OnMobile without any manual interference. On successful revert to each question customer will receive next question and so on via SMS. For each question, customer pays Rs.5/- and his scores will be added to his account. The entire above points are without any manual interference to maintain the confidentiality and avoid fraud. Winner Selection: Post completion of contest period as per terms and condition defined, highest scorer will be selected for each category of the winners. Page 22 of 28 Vodafone Question for registration to the contest -this question is flashed Locally on diverse subjects and doesn’t fetch any scoring points Customer Not enrolled No Yes C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT 5.4. In backdrop of the aforesaid procedure and the quiz contest the contents of the SMS dated 06/03/2014 is required to be considered and it is required to be considered whether the contents of the said SMS can be said to be inducing and/or luring the voter to cast the votes in favour of a particular person named in the said SMS and/or any political party, which would tantamount to ‘bribery’ as per Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act? The contents of the message is as follows; “2014 Election ma BJP na PM pad na umedvar….. (A) Narendra Modi (B) Rajnath Singh; SMS karo (A) or (B) to 567899 @ Rs.5/- SMS. Aapnu gyan aapne jitadi shake chhe Rs.10 lakhs” 5.5. Considering the aforesaid contents of the SMS and the aforesaid SMS, which seems to be a part of the quiz contest started from 05/02/2014, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the same tantamounts to inducement and/or luring the voter in favour of a particular person named in the SMS and/or in favour of a particular political party. Considering the contents of the aforesaid SMS, it appears to us that it would not amount to committing an offence of ‘bribery’ under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code and/or under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act. Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code reads as under; 171B Bribery-(1) Whoever- (i) gives a gratification to any person with the object of inducing him or any other person to Page 23 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT exercise any electoral right or of rewarding any person for having exercised any such right; or (ii) accepts either for himself or for any other person any gratification as a reward for exercising any such right or for inducing or attempting to induce any other person to exercise any such right; commits the offence of bribery: Provided that a declaration of public policy or a promise of public action shall not be an offence under this Section. (2) A person who offers, or agrees to give, or offers or attempts to produce, a gratification shall be deemed to give a gratification. (3) A person who obtains or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a gratification shall be deemed to accept a gratification, and a person who accepts a gratification as a motive for doing what he does not intend to do, or as a reward for doing what he has not done, shall be deemed to have accepted the gratification as a reward. Sub Section (1) of Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 reads as under; (1) “Bribery”, that is to say,- (A) any gift, offer or promise by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent of any gratification, Page 24 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT to any person whomsoever, with the object, directly or indirectly of inducing- (a) a person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being a candidate at an election, or (b) an elector to vote or refrain from voting at an election, or as a reward to- (i) a person for having so stood or not stood, or for having withdrawn or not having withdrawn his candidature; or (ii) an elector for having voted or refrained from voting; (B) the receipt of, or agreement to receive, any gratification, whether as a motive or a reward- (a) by a person for standing or not standing as, or for withdrawing or not withdrawing from being, a candidate; or (b) by any person whomsoever for himself or any other person for voting or refraining from voting, or inducing or attempting to induce any elector to vote or refrain from voting, or any candidate to withdraw or not to withdraw his candidature. Explanation-For the purposes of this clause the term “gratification” is not restricted to pecuniary gratifications or gratifications estimable in money and it includes all forms of entertainment and all forms of employment for reward but it does not include the payment of any expenses bona fide incurred at, or for the purpose of, any election and duly entered in the account of election Page 25 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT expenses referred to in Section 78.” 5.6. Now considering the contents of the SMS dated 06/03/2014 of which grievance is made by the petitioner and which according to the petitioner tantamounts to ‘bribery’ and committing the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code, it is not appreciable how the contents in the aforesaid SMS can be said to be ‘bribery’ and/or having committed the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. It is required to be noted at this stage that even as per the submissions made by Shri Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on one hand it is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the SMS sent by the Service Provider is a publicity of a particular political party i.e. Bhartiya Janta Party and on the other hand it is the case on behalf of the petitioner that it is luring the public and it amounts to ‘bribery’. On inquiry and investigation it has been found by the office of the Chief Electoral Officer that as no offence has been committed under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code, no complaint has been filed for the offence under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code. On inquiry, it has been found by the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat that the contents of the aforesaid SMS does not amount to breach of Model Code of Conduct and/or the same is not in any manner against the instruction/guidelines issued by the Election Commission from time to time, which does not appear to be on extraneous ground and/or without holding any inquiry. 5.7. Now so far as the contention on behalf of the petitioner that in the communication dated 21/03/2014 the petitioner was informed by the Under Secretary, Chief Electoral Officer, Page 26 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT Gujarat State that MCC Nodal Officer (SMS) has been instructed to direct Vodafone Service Provider to remove all questions related to politics, candidates, political parties, political functionaries from their quiz forthwith and that the Service Provider Company is being warned that if there is any violation of Model Code of Conduct, they will take necessary action means the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Gujarat State has found substance in the allegations in the complaint made by the petitioner and, therefore, having so instructed and having found prima facie case of violating the Model Code of Conduct and the guidelines, the respondents are required to file the Complaint under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, it appears that during pendency of the inquiry/ further investigation of the allegations made in the Complaint, with a view to avoid any further such complaint, if the Nodal Officer has instructed to direct the Service Provider (Vodafone) to remove the questions related to politics from their quiz and the Company is warned that necessary action shall be taken if there is violation of Model Code of Conduct, it cannot be said that there is any admission on the part of the Chief Electoral Officer/Office of the Chief Electoral Officer that the contents of the SMS is found objectionable and that any offence has been committed under Section 171B of the Indian Penal Code and/or the contents of the SMS amounts to ‘bribery’ as per Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act. 5.8. Now so far as the apprehensions and the allegations made in the petition by the petitioner against the Vodafone Company with a view to get favour in future from a particular party/Bhartiya Janta Party seems to be imaginary. It is required to be noted that as such the Service Provider Company against Page 27 of 28 C/SCA/4669/2014 CAV JUDGMENT whom the allegations are made is not a party to the present procedure. 5.9. Now so far as the prayer sought by the petitioner in paragraph nos. 19(B) and (C) reproduced hereinabove are concerned, no such reliefs can be granted as prayed for unless it is found that any activities of the Telecom Service Provider and in particular Vodafone Telecom Service Provider is found to be objectionable and, therefore, such reliefs cannot be granted. 6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, there is no substance in the present petition and the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. (M.R.SHAH, J.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Siji Page 28 of 28 "