Supreme Court: Private complaint under Section 200 CrPC is maintainable for offence under Section 125‑A RPA

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by Rajkumar Madki against Shailendra Beldale, holding that a private complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code is maintainable for an offence punishable under Section 125‑A of the Representation of the People Act, and that Section 195(1) CrPC does not bar such a complaint.

Mr Madki had filed a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging that the respondent, a sitting MLA, had furnished a false residential address in his nomination affidavit, an act constituting an offence under Section 125‑A of the Representation of the People Act. The trial magistrate dismissed the complaint on the ground that Section 195(1) CrPC required a public servant to initiate prosecution for such offences, raising the question whether a private individual could invoke Section 200 in this context.

The Court observed that Section 195(1) CrPC contains a specific list of offences for which a private complaint is barred, and that the legislature deliberately omitted Section 125‑A when the provision was inserted in 2002. Moreover, the clause ‘notwithstanding anything contained in any other law’ in Section 125‑A was held to exclude the application of Section 195(1). Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s finding of non‑maintainability, upheld the order quashing the trial magistrate’s proceedings on other grounds, dismissed the appeal and ordered each party to bear its own costs.

Read the judgment and its head note on DLJ: Rajkumar Madki vs Shailendra Beldale (2026 INSC 1138).