Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

The State Of Karnataka vs L.C. Nagaraj on 22 September, 2023

Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, Sanjay Karol

                                                       1

     ITEM NO.52                               COURT NO.9                     SECTION II-C

                                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F           I N D I A
                                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s).37568/2023

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14-07-2022
     in CRLP No. 1325/2022 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At
     Bengaluru)

     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA                                                   Petitioner(s)

                                                      VERSUS

     L.C. NAGARAJ                                                             Respondent(s)

     ( IA No.189540/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA
     No.189542/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )

     Date : 22-09-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL


     For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR
                        Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv.
                        Mr. Varun Varma, Adv.
                        Mr. M. Bangaraswamy, Adv.
                        Mr. S. Spandana Reddy, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)

                         UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

                                                  O R D E R

Heard Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, learned counsel for the petitioner. The counsel would submit that the respondent before qualifying in the Karnataka Administrative Service examination Signature Not Verified in 1998 was posted as Food Inspector. He Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2023.09.23 would then refer to the complaint of the Police Inspector, 14:27:12 IST Reason:

Anti Corruption Bureau dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure P-2) to 2 point out that the respondent has amassed huge assets valued at Rs.10 Crores 42 lakhs and those cannot relate to the legitimate income of the respondent. According to the government advocate, the investigation in the case is incomplete because of the interim order obtained by the respondent from the Court. Therefore, at this stage, the High Court according to Mr. Raghupathy should not have granted relief to the respondent, in his application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC with the observation that cognizable offence is not made out against the respondent. Issue notice both on the stay application and also on the application for condonation of delay.
Dasti, in addition, is permitted.
[DEEPAK JOSHI]                                       [KAMLESH RAWAT]
 COURT MASTER                                     ASSISTANT REGISTRAR