3 months ago
1
In an unprecedented verdict, the High Court of Karnataka has directed the State authorities to assistance authorisation nether Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act to alteration an probe against IAS serviceman Rohini Sindhuri and others by registering a First Information Report (FIR) connected a ailment alleging corruption successful the procurement of eco‑friendly cloth bags astatine exorbitant prices portion she was serving arsenic Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, successful 2021.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the bid portion allowing a petition filed by Mysuru-based advocator and societal activistic Ravichandre Gowda N.R.
The petitioner had questioned State government’s 2nd Government Order, dated May 26, 2025, rejecting the petition made by the erstwhile Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), present Lokayukta police, seeking support nether Section 17A of the PC Act from the competent authorization for conducting a probe connected the allegations against Ms. Sindhuri and the past managing manager of Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation (KHDC), which had supplied the bags.
‘₹13 bags purchased for ₹52’
The lawsuit dates backmost to March, 2021, erstwhile a gathering chaired by Ms. Sindhuri arsenic DC decided to prohibition integrative bags successful Mysuru territory and procure eco-friendly cloth bags. The KHDC was issued enactment orders to proviso 14.71 lakh bags astatine ₹52 per bag, totalling ₹7.65 crore.
The petitioner, successful his ailment to the past ACB, had alleged that identical bags were disposable successful the retail marketplace astatine conscionable ₹13 per bag, claiming the State exchequer suffered a nonaccomplishment of astir ₹5.88 crore. He further alleged that funds earmarked for improvement schemes successful gram panchayats were diverted towards the procurement of these bags.
The erstwhile ACB had initially requested the authorities to accord support for a probe nether Section 17A successful 2021. As the government, connected September 19, 2022, refused permission, the petitioner had filed a petition successful the High Court, which, successful February 2025, quashed the government’s determination of refusing permission, directing the authorities to walk an bid afresh.
Following this, the authorities had passed the contiguous bid connected May 26, 2025, again refusing support for conducting a probe by registering an FIR by citing the exoneration of Ms. Sindhuri successful a departmental enquiry conducted done a retired territory judge.
However, Justice Nagaprasanna said that “the exoneration successful a departmental proceeding cannot, successful law, run arsenic a protective shield insulating the serviceman from adjacent the threshold scrutiny of transgression investigation.”
“The ailment registered was neither vague nor speculative,” the tribunal observed. “It did acceptable out, with clarity and documentary support, allegation that prima facie discloses maltreatment of the bureau and consequential fiscal nonaccomplishment to the State.”
‘Not frivolous allegations’
In this case, the tribunal said, what emerges is “a acceptable of allegations that warrant, astatine the precise least, a thorough and impartial investigation” portion refusing to springiness a 3rd accidental to the authorities to instrumentality a determination connected granting permission.
The tribunal noted it would person usually remitted the lawsuit for caller consideration, but specified an workout would not lone beryllium “unfruitful but would besides prolong the process to the detriment of justice” arsenic the government, alternatively of a meaningful review, had repeated its earlier presumption with minimal justification contempt an accidental fixed by the tribunal successful February 2025.
Terming the government’s determination of rejecting support arsenic “perfunctory, bereft of substantive reasoning,” the Court said that the determination “fails to prosecute with the gravity of the allegation oregon worldly connected record, and thus, cannot withstand judicial scrutiny.”
