Banksy has cancelled his free print giveaway for people who could prove they voted against the Conservatives in the General Election.

The graffiti artist had offered voters in the Bristol North West, Bristol West, North Somerset, Thornbury, Kingswood and Filton constituencies a version of his famous 'balloon girl' print if they voted against the Tories.

But, he has now withdrawn the offer calling it 'ill-conceived and legally dubious' after Avon and Somerset Police received 'a number of complaints' and launched an investigation.

The new work was a print of his famous 'balloon girl', but with the red heart balloon replaced with the Union flag

Banksy has now withdrawn the offer calling it 'ill-conceived and legally dubious' after Avon and Somerset Police received 'a number of complaints' and launched an investigation

A statement on the Banksy website titled 'Product Recall' reads: 'I have been warned by the Electoral Commission that the free print offer will invalidate the election result.

'So I regret to announce this ill-conceived and legally dubious promotion has now been cancelled.'

Last week police told MailOnline that the graffiti artist's offer could constitute a criminal offence under rules which were first enacted in the 1800s.

The electoral offence of bribery carries an unlimited fine or a prison sentence of up to one year.

An announcement on Banksy's website says that a new piece will be released on June 9, the day after the General Election.

It is a print of 'balloon girl', but with the red heart balloon replaced with the Union flag.

The website said that the artwork 'is completely free' for voters in the Bristol constituencies.

The website said that the artwork was 'completely free' for voters in the Bristol North West, Bristol West, North Somerset, Thornbury, Kingswood and Filton constituencies

It added: 'Simply send in a photo of your ballot paper from polling day showing you voted against the Conservative incumbent and this complimentary gift will be mailed to you.'

A 'lawyer's note' disclaimer next to a photo of the work read: 'This print is a souvenir piece of campaign material, it is in no way meant to influence the choices of the electorate, has no monetary value, is for amusement purposes only and is strictly not for re-sale. Terms and conditions to follow, postage not included.'

But the elusive artist fell foul of the law with the Electoral Commission warning that bribery is an offence when someone 'directly or indirectly' gives any money to induce a vote.

He could have also been at risk from laws which say that inducing someone to take a photo of their ballot could also be classed as an offence.

The charity Crimestoppers warned voters to be wary of electoral fraud during the election.

The offer came after Banksy created a giant 'Brexit mural' in Dover in May

Its website stated: 'It's illegal to offer money or gifts to voters, directly or indirectly, to get someone to vote a certain way, or not to vote at all.'

Electoral law expert Dan Neidle, a partner at the firm Clifford Chance, told MailOnline that 'on the face of it' the offer could be classed as bribery.

He said: 'The law says that you're guilty of bribery if you give something to someone or promise to give something to someone in order to induce them to vote in a particular way.

'You have to do it corruptly - so what I expect he'll say if he gets the CPS threatening to prosecute is that he was joking and he'll say it wasn't corrupt.

'If all he ever did was put a post on Twitter or say it to a couple of mates, it may well look like he's joking.

William Kasper took these pictures in Bethlehem in 2007 and claimed they were of UK painter James Ames - one of the artists responsible for the iconic street pieces of Banksy

'But if he actually follows through and goes out there and gives things to people who promise to vote in particular way then it's not looking so good for him.'

Mr Neidle added that the disclaimer appeared to be a 'pathetic attempt to say he's not doing what he is doing'.

He said: 'Strictly the offence is committed now, it looks worse for him if he follows through - I suspect it's just a publicity stunt.

'This is all 19th century legislation drawn up when constituencies had a couple of hundred people and you could have bribed your way to winning.

'But no-one sane would think that nowadays - no matter how corrupt you are - you could influence an election result.'

A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said: 'The law in this area is complex.

'Given the risk that someone taking a photo inside a polling station may be in breach of the law, whether intentionally or not, the commission's advice is against taking any photos inside polling stations.'