Bengaluru Court Orders Arrest of Actor Prakash Raj
A court in Bengaluru has issued a non-bailable warrant (NBW) for the arrest of actor Prakash Raj, who formerly ran as an independent candidate in the Lok Sabha elections. The warrant comes in response to allegations of voter registration in multiple assembly constituencies across various states, which were reportedly not disclosed in his election affidavit.
Legal Proceedings and Court Orders
The XLVIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court in Bengaluru, overseen by Magistrate Jyoti Shantappa Kale, has issued the NBW after multiple unsuccessful attempts to serve summons to the actor. The court had previously directed, “Counsel for complainant present. Re-issue summons to accused through Commissioner of Police, Bangalore. For report.” This instruction was given on March 17, 2026.
On April 17, 2026, the court noted that the accused had moved from his last known address, leading to the issuance of the NBW. The case continued to reflect the NBW’s enforcement status as of June 12, 2026, when the presiding officer was on training, with the next hearing date set for July 25, 2026.
Background of the Case
The proceedings stem from a complaint by Bengaluru resident K Dileep Kumar. The magistrate took cognizance of potential offenses under Sections 31 and 125A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, on August 1, 2025. These provisions address false declarations related to electoral rolls and the submission of misleading affidavits.
The complainant claims that Prakash Raj, who ran for the Bengaluru Central constituency in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, filed an affidavit indicating his voter registration in the Shantinagar Assembly constituency in Bengaluru. However, he is accused of being simultaneously registered in three additional electoral rolls, including two in Velachery, Chennai, and one in Serilingampally, Telangana.
More Read
Legal Implications and Evidence
Sections 17 and 18 of the Representation of the People Act prohibit multiple registrations across constituencies or within the same constituency. Section 31 penalizes false declarations related to electoral rolls, while Section 125A outlines penalties for false affidavits.
In support of the complaint, K Dileep Kumar testified and presented seven documents, including the affidavit filed by Prakash Raj with his nomination papers and voter information records purportedly showing his enrollment in Velachery and Serilingampally.
After examining the complaint, oral testimonies, and documentary evidence, the magistrate concluded that the records prima facie indicated the accused’s name appeared in electoral rolls in three different locations in 2019, contrary to the affidavit’s assertion of enrollment solely in Shantinagar.
More Read
Court’s Decision
The court concluded there was sufficient evidence to proceed against Prakash Raj for offenses under Sections 31 and 125A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The ongoing legal proceedings highlight the seriousness of the allegations and the judicial process involved in addressing potential electoral malpractice.
