The court found that the Petitioner’s allegations regarding the ulterior motive behind his arrest and prosecution were uncontroverted, as the Respondent did not file any response or replying affidavit. The evidence indicated that the Petitioner was performing his lawful duties as a tally agent when he was arrested, and there was no specific evidence of him hindering the Returning Officer beyond questioning the tallying process. The court held that, in the absence of any denial, the prosecution was intended to remove the Petitioner from the tallying centre and hinder him from executing his lawful duties, amounting to an abuse of prosecutorial power for an ulterior purpose. The court concluded that the proceedings were not in the public interest and granted a permanent stay of the criminal proceedings, but declined to award damages due to lack of demonstrated loss.