Rajya Sabha Election Bribery Row: Karnataka High Court Orders No Coercive Steps Against 4 Accused Of Trying To Bribe Odisha Congress MLAs

The Karnataka High Court in an interim order on Tuesday (April 21) restrained the State from taking any coercive steps against four men booked in an FIR over allegations of attempting to bribe Odisha Congress MLAs to vote in favour of BJP candidate during Rajya Sabha elections from the State conducted in March. The petitioners had approached the high court seeking quashing of the FIR, wherein their counsel Angad Kamath argued before Justice M Nagaprasanna that the entire incident was premeditated and politically scripted. Kamath argued that the FIR alleges that the petitioners offered Rs. 5 cores to the MLAs however there was no recovery or trap proceedings. After hearing the arguments for some time the court in its order said:“The respondent shall not take any precipitative action against the petitioners or take any coercive steps against the petitioners till the next date of hearing. List the matter with fresh matters tomorrow [April 22]”. The counsel argued that two of the four accused have secured bail, and the other two are under the apprehension of their arrest. At this stage the State sought time to get instructions in the matter.The petitioners include a lawyer from Odisha, a former real estate company CEO and two businessmen who have claimed in the petition that they were scouting for a plot to establish a hotel in Karnataka by availing the legal assistance of the first petitioner. It is stated that they were staying at Wonderla Hotel and Resort in Bidadi.The plea states meanwhile elections Rajya Sabha from the State of Odisha were scheduled for 16.03.2026 and in the run to the elections the Congress had shifted some of its MLAs to the same resort in Bidadi, on an apprehension that attempts were being made to influence or poach them. The plea claims that on 15.03.2026, while the petitioners were at the restaurant in the resort, some persons confronted them on the allegation that Petitioner No.1 was attempting to entice MLAs from Odisha. The petitioners stated that police thereafter restrained them and kept them in custody. The plea states that they were then informed that Respondent No.2 Ashok Kumar Das, Deputy Leader of the Congress Party, Odisha had lodged a complaint against them.The plea claims that it has been alleged on 15.03.2026 four persons met some of the MLAs at the resort and they attempted to offer Rs.5 crores each for cross-voting in favour of the BJP candidate and upon rejection of the offer, threats were allegedly extended. The plea claims that the complaint/FIR narrative, while describing the approached persons as “four unknown people”, also sets out the names of the petitioners. Based on the complaint, an FIR was lodged under Sections 173(punishment for bribery), 62(punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment), 352(intentional insult with intent to provoke a breach of peace), 351(2) (criminal intimidation) read with 3(5) (common intention) BNS and Sections 7A and 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act on 15-3-2026. The petitioners were granted regular bail on March 23. The petitioners have argued that the FIR narrative itself is confined to an alleged election-related inducement/threat episode at the resort, yet the matter was converted into a wider cognizable prosecution. According to the petitioners, the police has wrongly charged them for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and BNS, 2023.A bare reading of the FIR only reveals allegations of non-cognisable election offences, the petition states.“In a case which, on proper statutory characterisation, is non-cognizable, investigation without the order of the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 174(2) of the BNSS is without jurisdiction and vitiates the entire process”, the plea states.At the time of production before the Magistrate, the police deleted Section 140(1) BNS charge [kidnapping with the intent to murder or for ransom]. By virtue of this, the petitioners argue that once the police deleted Section 140(1) BNS, the other offences are only non-cognizable under the First Schedule of the BNSS.“…"This chronology... shows that the criminal process was deployed not in fidelity to the correct statutory framework, but as a means of exerting immediate pressure," the petitioners submits in their plea that the initial addition of Section 140(1) was itended to justify the immediate arrest and custody of the accused.The petitioners also challenge the invocation of Prevent of Corruption Act provisions, especially Section 7A. "The allegation in the present case... is not that the Petitioners 'accepted' or 'attempted to obtain' any undue advantage from some third person in order to influence a public servant; the allegation is of a direct offer allegedly made to legislators to cross-vote," the plea states.Case Title: Mr. Birendra Prasad and Others vs. The State of Karnataka and AnotherCrl P No. 6091 of 2026

Rajya Sabha Election Bribery Row: Karnataka High Court Orders No Coercive Steps Against 4 Accused Of Trying To Bribe Odisha Congress MLAs

Sebin James

Tags