The State Of Karnataka vs Arjundas S/O Late Ramadas on 30 March, 2010

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court

The State Of Karnataka vs Arjundas S/O Late Ramadas on 30 March, 2010

Bench: Manjula Chellur, Mohan Shantanagoudar

H;_
IN "IRE HIGH Cﬁiiﬂ?' G? §€AR§%f§{§"AKﬁ AT 8AE'«fG.i§LGRE

msrm Thus 'mg 33*" mar 95 MARCH mm

PR§$EN"¥" :

WE §~§0N'B§..,E MRSJUSTICE MANEULA CHE§g§;i$~R3;;;..,,j..:'V:  

AND

THE &-a0r~:*ai.,E MR.JUSTICﬁ MOHAi'§Jé»H§NTi§b§£iG€§:t$--ﬁ.§;:§'VV_ 

 

a63,:£sVzi»s-x:_m -. «A " '

 

C/w. WRIT APPEAL No.V5t_2§i':"3_%'

W.A,No.2193/2003 :

Between :

3.. T¥1eState Qf§{ar §1atak;;§, V  _  
Ev its Chief  S3_eCrg.'?<ta_ry,V   '   " 

Vidhﬁﬁﬁ :11:  " 'V
Banga Iore--_;1;'<"._-   

2. L0!-<ayz.2'%4:":E}a iF?0i'Ec;é; "
Representezi by De9z;.:yv;'S;.é3§erénte:3dent
C§ty:VE>--§v_Esi0r:; A  " '

Ka;_;*'ri.:a t;a__iT<a{ La ké'3;=u.i<_taz'

._ ?:r:S'L'%:%:s;'»::;§:n§g:.<;-,,%
 ' 8a':'2-.ga§vQ:'e§1.;  .,

  3. Le:.k'a§:u.§<%$ j'j 

Kam ate; ka. V 
, Qffice. Qfithe Lakayukta
  State £3? Karnataka
ff MQS-...§Buiid§ngs_F
=.Bfa:2gaEer€--1,
%~%:e§resem:ed by Sig

   figgésirag",



Ix.)

Kamataka Lekayukta ﬁfﬁcg
BangaE0:*eA:. ., Apgeiéareta 

{ ﬁg; Smt,A:§.\i%jay'a, ASA 3

£\_i}.«;i.. 1 
1. Arjumdag
Son sf Eats Ramadas
Aged about 51 yearg,
Deputy C€}£T1F'l"1§SSiOf'§8?",
Of Excise, Keiar Dist,
KoEar. 

2, B.C,Devaraj,   9
Son of Chikkanna  '
Aged about 28_yea'rs,  _   ~ I
R/A.No.116,H€TQFe§:'"'R.:3ad'i.    
Frazer Towﬁ'; , . "   ' _  '
Bangaiore-56.V0"»-053?, '   «. " ,~
(Cans h'i'm'se!.f":5;s tﬁfe'-Pri;;3ﬁet0r}"""' "
(EPA iivjiolderofi    M ;
W5. Rag h_ave:_r2d ha» .Wi.né3_ ' 
Frazerﬁown, ' "  _  '
BangaEorTe=...} " V    .. Respondents

 ,_( Bigf_ §':3r£E_.JC.E'2,_.G@;:§é!a3wamy 8: Asst$., Advocate
' {gr Pei; an_d"S;*E Manikagpa Patéf, Advocate

This ,.._Wrif::""Ap§eai E3 fiieﬁ under Sectian 4 of the

' ': v4.é<a:§%:ata_ka "High Court Act praying to set aside the erdar

 %gas§ea;;;*'m ms: Patéiion f\Ea&33S1E/'Z011 dated 288.28%;

, ~./ g
K' //V.



W..,A.No.5(345,f2002 2:
Bgtween :

B_C.Devaraj,

S/0 Chikkarma

Ageﬁ about 30 years,
R/'A.No.29?, 4"' Bfack
Rajajmagar,

Eﬁaﬁgaiorewm' V   «. " 

(By Sré Manikapga Patti! and  _ 
Sr: Chandrashekar Patii, Advosatés} 

And ;

1, 'me State of       
By its Chief Se'cret-afy,'      '
Vidhana SOL3.§iiHa  ' '
8anga!o*s"e»1,"'j. V

2" Lokayu':<thLa4Poticegj-._V ' % _
Represehied %by D.e;::«;:'iy_ 'S.:;§3'érintendent
City Divisiom  
Karna"aaka Lokaytjkta '

 M5._"8';Jii:d1i'n9.S,  %%%%% 

"33 ngaxcrgm 

33 §;0E«:;ay;:}2i«:-ftéa-,  .
Kam':ai:ai<a*--' ij 

Qffi'c:..e 0fv'th.e.--~'mkayz;E<ta
State 0f?<,amata%<a
"M.S.Bui'i:"iing$,
j_*;'%Vanig--aEere~1,

Repregented ﬁx; its
Rggéstrar,

...£»<-Samataka Lskgyukta Gffice



Eangaiore-1.

5%. ﬁmjamdag
Sat: 02' iate Ramacias
Aged about $3. years,
Seputy Commmséonerg
Qf Excise, §u£E:)arga Dist,

Guibarga,     

( By ﬁmtﬁaﬂvijaya, ASA fer Rwi  ._
Sré Mﬁudhakar' Pai, Adv0Ca.ta'_f0r R7--p?; 8;; 3 
And M/3. C.Rﬁopalaswamy«.&*Asst$.",  V _
Advocates for R-4 )  " '-

Thig Writ Appeai ' fiE<~:»2'c':E,_v§'£%}déV'r:V:M_3éc%iVon 4 of the
Kamataka High Court Ac§_p 'rayin_g ;to--"'~set~.._'e.side the order
passed in the WritF?ef.:.E_tionfNo;3:3f:'E15/RG11 §§a'ted 28,8.2{302.

These   for hearing this day,
MANEULA CHELl_,VU-:R_,';.J., Cie!Eye.f}3d"':hV'e '§of'I0wEng :

W:f§_t_ ;5\p§7eaJ ' N¢;%%2193;'~2Loo3 is med by the State and

,j"wArzt A-',%3 f3e;;.;": %\£v0A..504v:1';'3f"'27'"U(}2 is ﬂied by the Cemplainant for

q L;:e;-§f:s3";«ii_if1'g;T.t§E't-;§§§'Ed§f:..pa5sed by the teamed Singie Eudge in

 <.Writ ?§*:itiQ{3. §$.;}*;:;33S1S/2061, wherein the Eeamed Singie

_.V_jAj'§j':..«,1_i,:;:iyge %":a:~;7 c;:_:asi:ed the erder gagged by the Karnataka

a§ é;_agz§;§<:_«a Es: :x:o.caMP":",rL@s</ac9~:2?;9§-2;0@0 dateﬁ

.   azidie Annexurew' A' is the 'r;'~é%'i§ petitim.



2' the entire atorttrovetgy oertaéns to Section to of tho

Karnataka Lokaytzkta Act, 1984 (hereinafter reforre.:3'~..to_.'_2::.$
The Lokayzgkta Act' for short) ano Section 19 
of Corruption Aast, 3.988' In the ores_,e,1ff2,.t:,__<:ase_,"'"ir':'§§éV3ti'ga':§.ont-_  '

came to be maria at the behest of Lof~i;3yL;{_i<ta:'. t*é*he~r:eiaftio:};~..,a{'f;.j

enquiry wag Conducted and  e:*:o':;:'iV}r"y',..:?va:§
accordoé by the Lokayokta t;o,:V":Ag3:rf_o§e;ft:ut.e5  gécouseo
government ofﬁ<::'a¥ -« ttaetttttithﬁtt-2L.'ti:}'e§'ou'tg{'..:'p€:o;t1n1issioner of
Excise, Bangalore tftoan  the same,
writ petition €a:_t3?iE§t:, r"é.It§f.r.i__A'::::3::/E i;;:t§§'cLVifsé£j questioning the
authority or__  Vsanction prosecution

u nder Section ._ 145$ .tE'~1,.e" 'Lo  -'Act,

3. __ Ap'o'a»reVir'atiy;-. f?.3é"5Subject with which we are

:_v'oon:err.,£i§d  those o1a'i;'te'r9s fang under the Concurrent Liot,

E\to'.;§I«T' of"t.t§e.,_§fio:é:::tit;:tEon, The two enactments which govern

'"<../.___,fg;ho .$ts'oj+ectv_.Eot;ttot are E<'amatai<a Lokayukta Act and

.j '_:«.'_§?%€<'*={€%'iE§O¥'1"§f'1.CO§'i"LE;3'Ci0£'"i Act, Sub~c:Iause (2) of Arti<:§@ 254 of

t.het:"Cot:§t%tut%oo of India is very rotovatzt for aosweting the

-tfoottoivorgy in questior; whtcté woofo be referred to ooiowt



Tim §E§8£'ﬁE*C§ §%rtg§€ Judge quaafzeé the impugngﬁ 956%: at

Anr:e><:_:re«'A' far different reasens, mi piaiéng reEi;m§:'e._€:;..rf}

the various judgmerzts, The Eegaé question

"'wh@t%:er there is repugnancy between_t§_2e Séié-i'té" "

and the Centavai Act?". Section 19 9f ?irev;e'ra£§oh»§f"~fiZ{br2%i:§:i'€:3.5r;~.:

Act reads; as unﬁer :

"' Section 19 .'_ _i5}?i§:"vLS§;yz:V§~..ésan<':V§fio}§
necessary for pro§éC;Iti'0..n.ii".::-  court:
shall take cog.:2§:an:;e"of« :gé9a&r:"e>.f.f"»er'1'<:xé ;i}.Tu'»s*}i'shabEe
under Sect§%§jh'gf;:jT»:~'? ,_  11; V 1.13.*:_"a._zV":'c;i i£1*"'aiieged to
have beiéﬁ  a =;>u'bfic servant,

except:A-with~;1:hé'1;3:r:ev';«o'us 'san-ctaovm

(a)  °in"t«hé cajVse:5}:>f5"a._:f3efson who is employed
in connéc--t§ en y§Et_h tvhe«.:.'i§ffairs of the Union and
V is_r_§s'@'t r.em0v'2:Ab_f ¢Vfrofn his effice save by or with
" V'  A}:I?ré:'§=£":"'i';r:t':T'<;>.ésj_1 of tIVﬁ é' Centra§ Gaverrrmentf Qf that

' =*f'3§a:e'§V;3p:9ﬁvé':A1§j',i 

 v_.£.§:~ t::;§"iz-3 case Qf a perscn who is emgieg/ed
V in act:-rj 'r§ec:'r:i0r2 with the affairs «::>f a State and is
 A¢2?:3~%7.é're}r:0vab§@ fram hig efffce save by er with
"'..w€§ie':san£tEe:2 9? the State Sovernmenif gf that

_ ﬁevernment;



._"_§

{C} in am Case <3?' any athez' QE§"'SQ€'E, <3?' the

autharéty campetent :0 remeve him from hég 

afﬁsa'

{Z} Wham far any reasm vg{§f:atsQe;'.re:rV--. §:::3:y7'~::: '-

doubt arises a3 to whethegr '§3gT:&'%;i'a;;;;s.VV._: "°

sanctien as rﬁquired under "$.;;b"» Sectio'n_.. {:2}: " "

shouEd be gix/an by the Ceﬁ'::aE GAt;w;3e}r:*:;j"i'eVz_*1t§._§:':'-V» 

the State Government Gr a::*2*:§:_e--tijer éas.,sf::f1 Qrit§Qg
such sanctim":   by 
Government or autfﬁ%<3z'"';*t'g}§}izs%'§ic_tj ~:§>$4{~:::{1i_{i have
been c:ompe.i: e:f3_t t§»_'AV"riért{<§v_e:"«f}j:--e,§  servant
from hi_s..  jf,v'?:érf1'"'Eh@ offence

was aiIég.ed__"tQ h'é've._Tbé:_-izni 'c<3Vr3"2:*:j1i'€ted.

 Not§§E'ti:--3.ﬁénd'i'n§"am/t.hing contained in the
Code' gf"CrEmViVria--if':1'rb'u:i§€.Eu'%e,, 1973 (2 of19174);~

   fiﬁding, sentence or erder

  L'pfés}:f.ié:d'"'bxf a Séééial ludge shaii be reversed er

' _a'Ei'.é'z**E=_.;étii»v':E)§{V Court: in appeal, confirmation er

 "révE§i<3'%*:j§}~2 {he greamd 9'? the absence sf, er any

'."$e¥'§'(,}'Vf'if iskhissien or irregmarity inf the sanctian

 n _r'e.€;'i.;--i:é'ed under subwsectéen (1), améess in the

 v._»_ §;Enian af that mutt, a faiéure sf justiae ha$ Er:

faiit mm accagieneﬁ tharebyg



_ g; _
{bi me sear: shaié stay the praaeedmgs

.-'

under thig AC: an the graund of any error;

oméssier: $5 érraguiaréty in the sanctérgn granteé 
by the amiharity, unﬁess it is satisfied that $uch'=. "~-- "

ermr, amiggéon er Erreguiarity has resuEteé_\EfH'a1" 1- 

faiiasre ofjustice;

{C} no {curt ahaﬁi S'Cay;'-._'E%'¥€3._:"';'}Z?:EZ}C&EédAi'ﬁ'g$'" "
under this Act an any _<3-*:_t_1er g"2ic_iu~r:d a_mf;A.rfi'o«'

court shaii exercise the p"'e'-,y."'x':":?;=,r's of'--rev%s;i}:>rz\i»n' "

reiatian to any interiQcut0:fyz---owe?"passed' 

inquiry, triai, appeai"-0:%:"- Qti}€3r2{_»p»vfC4)'€fE§u'?:Cii'i$393,

(4) In de?:§:t'fmini::'iVg""'L§V§j:r§.ér_?».s'ui%.~$:éCfEon (3)

whether f:h,e a§7Us__enCa clf,'VV0r4_:ar}y" é:"':'<;fr, omission

or Zigrreg:;lz;ii'i**.:.y-«~..i_»aé',A s':zvcTf1'vv--sa--r1ctEon has occasioned
er resiglted Erzfa'--fVai¥i:";=§§'"ef"justic:e the court shah

have r*e 'ga:fc:i .t of . th-3 Vf'::i{:t whether the ebjection

 aﬁd A's'-E":'<:;:_E§i» have been raised at any

'n.,ear_Eie:f st 'a--ge in the proceedings"

 'fkgiafrséjgigggzmg For the gsurposgs sf this S€Ct§Gf7,'

(a} ; error énciuéeg competency of the

AA '"a;L.:t?{oréiy is gran: ganctiezég



#2'/gr

(E) 3 gancitéorz required far prssecutémz

érztiudag reference :9 any raquiremerzt that tjzew 

Qi"G$8CLé'{'§G§': sham $e at the énstance 

sgeciféad autheriiy or with the sanction   
specified pergan G!' any requirement m' a"s1:'vaE§;%%f'  '

naturef
Sectien 14 01' the E.oi»£:TV;a1v%mLkt:a Act: rea;dT'.~»:.V:a§.__:a'z"r':ds:'E' :

"Section 14;__.W_;  -'i_}IjnVi"t;Ea;tioné"*3?
prosecution : If a'ft:e}j..é£1-*e'_eE%ti€g'é'r£.ﬁ}néV:AEr-_to any
Compiaint the,_Lo kayL;.!<-tég pr'  L}.;r5'a¥A:i;r_"§?.k:£iyu kta
is gatzisﬁed" "Aif;?.1:r§"fit gthe ':--"'[email protected]§/rarit has
committed' asnd shoufd be
prosev(:;.1_1;Ve§~V.Vi:h' é.;::_QQL:.,r:t'  §'¢sxr§I:..Vf_o»:§*' such offence,
then; he  >an»_T'0»r§§ar.' to that effect and
Enitia1:fé  prQ5eQ_Li'f:iL:OVri»V"-.r§f"="the pubiéc: servant
conr;:ernéd~..an'd.if'V--.pr:<)sr":3én<:tion of any authority
£s..«§;.req:ziredV.' '"---far ____ __:suc:h prosecutiera, then,

 rgV§'txwi§5sté§:dV§ng anything aontamed in any law,
 ;$§,:§»?:VE'2:§a§§{}}fViQ¥f§_i.~sha!§ be deemed {:0 have been
 grré'r1ted; ri;¥"i3_'rilthe appmpriate autherity an the

daiie..e"'f.a5:::E": order."

AAVi£>rjré'"a.{§s0 is Sigh-dﬁuge {2} Qt' Artécﬁe 254 92' the

   {_Z§0":*2st§§u:téar2 Q? Eméa rﬁadg as iméer :



      

v_%@" éha

 {2} Vxiheyé a Eaw maée by the Legisiature 0?
a Statg with reggsect ta ene sf the matters

enumerates in the CGRCUFFQHE List cantaém ar':$§"'.f""«, 

pravisiena repugﬁant to the pmvésians 9?. "' A

eartier {aw made by Parfiament car  
Eaw with respect ta that matter}; ifhéh! ,.i".h.g 
made hy the Legésiatura of suc1hhSi:.;=3:_t7e:T shhah; Eff: 
has been reserved far thé'<:§n§iLfieréz_i{2hh'€§?3i;_§v;«e. 
President and has received'V'hiv§';as§enf,"pfeakzaif in
that State: '     

Pro'./idea? that  tE'€i'£~E.'V:;:E.72;3_:;:';*;§e shaii
prevent Pa.rE'i':3.rh_'ent::_frogm:..~'ezééﬁiiihéifsg._.__§Vif any time
any £avg  i»'\;_:1;h:». » --;r1c§§;;é3_<::i'  the  same matter
includé-ng_:é~;5lé\)Q'i:f;addi':§f£;:'--.i:'o; ameriding, varying or
repéaiing  by the Legisiature of
the SAt1a.i';@",7     

{Sf} ge__;i'u<g,_a5 0?"ti1es::.e~tw0 prevésions, it is very clear that

§--:O'Vh§O~t¢"Cja!,f:.=§§?'2_ of Articfe 254 of the Cemstitutiera 91' India

_ w0::E'ti.{:?§méé 'E.'~%3?:r§.5'V;i3Ea~,I and the State iaw even if gets the
_a's:"_sen% "of §3§"€Si3€F'1t much iater than the Centrai

 that gamer: of the §§"GV§SiQI'E which is repugnant

Cehtraé e¥"iaCiE?'t&i'E5E cahhet have am! heﬁds



   

wiiw
"me éeamgsi ceurzsei fer the aapaiiarztg reﬁes war: the

judgment 0? this Cami in the case of C,K..v'ENKATAS£JB3A

RAG --v$~ 8,K.RAN(3'ANA TH { 1m 199: EAR 4395'} angi ..a5;i»-:.:;;o7~in

the case at' SRANGANARASAIAH -vs»-= _5'$"_f.'éfS';----i .
KARNATAKA ( Int 1994 KAR 3595;.» .I'r§'=§:;i:h"~~.:tE';ese"  2
judgments, Cencurrent Lésst in the E:«;"}.;che.~:_x:§:_:.E:§;2 «cf C'¢:'r:§ti¥::::;%-i:§<§A;:g AA

was met at aii ccmsidered ar25 «...§hey"'-%ié»'§ ;:~';f'éC.}.ee.d§d.'3 E?) 

consiéer sanction under Sectim___L:i4 _of_v thé' LQ:I§ay;,§%kta Act
anlyx.

4. The Eearned.Singi:e"--3a.dge  the case of

v,L.sHAz§sKA1-2T.  A§:%or.Q_E:2"  ---«vs» STATE op
KARNATAKA _ to consider the above

provisioﬁsv of i~f;"arn'atak;--a L::ka23}Lakta Act and also Prevention of

'iierru;z'§i':€;n;'_A!$<:'£:»vM.yvith  f'e'fea*~;-zynce ts proviso ta c:Iause~--2 of Artécie

v";§f"'Eh"=5.»_;'C%§':':.§tE§ution sf India. in the said case, the

'   §etit:§C§_'_'1'é§" Svf"z.a":r'€§§_g::} chaiienged the arders dt.§.5.},.2QG1 af Ups:
.. fj...4£;:3i§a3:;;kta:_'ézccarﬁing sanctisn under sectéen 14 9f the
" ...K'ié%_s:3}é:'k«a Lekayukta Mt recammenﬁing fer the pregecutéen

 t"§}'ze effermes gunighabié under seatiens ?, i3(2.)(é'} reaci



with eeetéerz 13(2) et tee Preventien of CGf€'£i§t§O§"§ eat etc.
Ever: taking cegnézeeee ef the effeeeee by the Cenge»t4;%ie.;£

Ceett was the subject matter ef the chaiteege.

5' Accoreéeg t0 the eppeiient, f-o'%"§ni«téet'iten_:

reseect of any 0? the offences fer wahicii-_;f>tevEt:;:e" eeeétite-rT1: '

was required under sectioﬁ V  the.' 5?:rVev:;e":'-Vzt'it§'a'i  ef
Cerruption Act 1988, accerdtng ee"r'éetV;:QhVV"e;§deré'«Seetiet: 14 at
Lekayukta Act was 92"' no eve;_i'i', L-tee'V;the'«:e.gj;tjv"'ejrcumstances,
the teamed Sing!:e..-lied-ge  in V§€W at the
corafiict or  and having regard to
the fact  'i_<>t<'._éiiyhtiV:<i:a Act is repugnant to
provigions  Act, 1988 Act, so far

as power te graa':*et_Sar1.€:'-ti0i'v2 ft)?" prosecution, the Prevention of

:,'j'CVQ'rrupt'§.e':n sect v:»x{euid:Hj:35fe'véii in such Situation" Therefere; it is

veﬁj ";:jt'eg"a':< :}t'%:_ett»v4"§a;§1"§:tEon unejer Section 14 0? Lokayukte eat

"=,,,;carm0t.__;i:¥e eqtstettee with the eriot sanction required under

4 "j-..SeT::.tien 19' efi-the Prevention at Cerruptéoe Act fee a particuiar

 eft'ein::.e;». fftéerefere, erier eaeetéen te eteeeeete meet Seetéer:

.  etiihe RC9 Act is e meet in reeeeet at the offeeeee eiiegeé

 



"W

agaéngt {he $€{:§$@§: it wouiﬁ mt camgensate éefénéieiy Sy

gamction under Seitiaﬁ 14 cf Lekayukta Act, "¥"E*1erez'o4a*.':*eV,:"-;:;';*§:.:V:"

sarsctéen Lméer Sectian 19 at' the ﬁreventiors af  .

aione wit! be the proper course'

AC«::0£'§§ngEy both the appeais :§?f§ '.ﬁ'i$tnfS$é€§ 

iéght 0? the above absewatiens,

 

 .
Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

The State Of Karnataka vs Arjundas S/O Late Ramadas on 30 March, 2010

Bench: Manjula Chellur, Mohan Shantanagoudar
