BENGALURU: A special sessions court for trial of criminal cases against sitting and former MPs and MLAs has rejected an application by B Boopalan, as ‘party-in-person’ from the city, seeking recusal of the special judge from hearing his criminal revision petition challenging the rejection of his private complaint to prosecute PM Modi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh.
Accusing them of failing to protect him from Havana Syndrome Technology (HST), the applicant alleged that they used HST on him. However, the court did not notice the crimes of the PM and the defence minister because ISRO failed to give a reply explaining the use of dangerous weapons on him, he alleged. The special court of magistrate rejected his private complaint on December 1, 2025.
The magistrate noted that the complaint appears to be misconceived and there are no prima facie materials that would satisfy the ingredients of the alleged offences under the provisions of BNS such as attempt to murder, voluntarily causing hurt, malignant act likely to spread infection of a dangerous disease and criminal intimidation, either to take cognisance of the said offences or refer this complaint for investigation to any investigating agency under Section 175(3) of BNSS.
The petitioner, in the application filed for recusal and direction to list this case before another appropriate court, alleged that the special court did not consider the provisions alleged despite having convicted the commission of alleged offences.
Judge Shivaprasad KB of the special court noted that he heard the complainant on four occasions in September and October and directed him to submit his written arguments. The petitioner submitted that the matter involves cyber security and technology issues and therefore, the revision petition needs to be heard by the court which deals with the cyber offence-related matters.
The application does not indicate the specific incident of bias of this court, and there is no reasonable apprehension to justify his prayer.
The administration of justice is a solemn duty of the court. On the basis of vague, baseless apprehensions of a party, the court cannot shirk its solemn responsibility of deciding the matter before it, in accordance with law and transfer the case to another court. No other court has the jurisdiction to hear the cases against elected representatives, said the special court, while rejecting the petition and directing the petitioner to submit his written arguments on or before November 7.
Background
It was stated in the private complaint that Boopalan joined the army in 2004 and was released from service in 2020. He alleged that the Union government, through DRDO and ISRO, used technology that emits high-frequency microwave radiation, which causes Havana Syndrome in human beings.
During his service in the army, he was part of the HST experiment and as such he suffered the effects of the said syndrome such as fever, headache, dizziness, nausea, fatigue, blurred vision, light sensitivity, electric shock on teeth, hearing strange sounds, heating skin, severe aches on body and vertigo. DRDO and ISRO under the PM and defence minister are responsible for the said illness, he alleged.
The magistrate, however, rejected the complaint, stating that the materials produced in support of his allegations would neither substantiate that he has been suffering from any such disorder nor show that the same is due to the alleged Havana Syndrome.