Karnataka High Court
Kapil Mohan vs State Of Karnataka on 6 April, 2017
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION No.41562 OF 2015
CONNECTED WITH
WRIT PETITION No.42022 OF 2015 (GM-RES )
In W.P.No.41562/2015
BETWEEN:
Kapil Mohan,
S/o Naresh Mohan,
Aged about 52 years,
R/o House No.63, 14th B Main,
Sector IV, H.S.R.Layout,
Bengaluru - 560 034.
Currently Serving as;
Principal Secretary,
Department of Youth Affairs and Sports,
Government of Karnataka,
M.S.Building
Bengaluru - 560 001.
...Petitioner
(By Shri Ravi.B.Naik, Sr.Counsel for
Shri.Bharath Kumar.V, Advocate)
2
AND:
1. State of Karnataka,
Through,
Superintendent of Police,
Karnataka Loyayuktha,
Bengaluru City,
M.S.Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. S.D.Venkataswamy,
Dy.Superintendent of Police,
Karnataka Lokayuktha,
Bengaluru City,
M.S.Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
...Respondents
(By Shri Venkatesh S.Arabatti, Special Public Prosecutor)
*****
This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure praying to quash the FIR and information
bearing No.64/2015 dated 15.09.2015 & 16.09.2015 registered
with the R-1 Police Station i.e., Lokayuktha Police, Bengaluru
City (Annexure-A & A1)
In W.P.No.42022/2015
BETWEEN:
Richa Saxena,
W/o Kapil Mohan,
Aged about 49 years,
3
R/o House No.63, 14th B Main,
Sector IV, H.S.R.Layout,
Bengaluru - 560 034.
Currently Serving as;
Senior Medical Officer,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
Office of the Joint Director,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
Anandarao Circle,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
...Petitioner
(By Shri Ravi.B.Naik, Sr.Counsel for
Shri.Manjunath M.R. Advocate)
AND:
1. State of Karnataka,
Through,
Superintendent of Police,
Karnataka Loyayuktha,
Bengaluru City,
M.S.Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. S.D.Venkataswamy,
Dy.Superintendent of Police,
Karnataka Lokayuktha,
Bengaluru City,
M.S.Building
Bengaluru - 560 001.
...Respondents
(By Shri Prasad B.S, Special Public Prosecutor)
*****
4
This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure praying to quash the FIR and information
bearing No.64/2015 dated 16.09.2015 registered with the R-1
vide Annexure-A & A1.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing
in 'B' Group, this day, the court made the following:
ORDER
Heard Shri Ravi B Naik, Senior Advocate appearing for the Counsel for the petitioners. It is vehemently contended that though the respondents claim to have completed the investigation and a final report has been filed, the infirmities in the case of the prosecution is writ large. First of all, the respondents are not even sure about the designation of the petitioner in WP 41562/2015. Secondly, the allegations against the petitioner are wildly imaginary, in that, it is alleged that he has involves in a lottery case with a third party and the allegations extend to claiming that the petitioner possessed disproportionate assets as against his known sources of income, not only against the petitioner, but also his wife, the petitioner 5 in WP 42022/2015, who has been roped in as a co-accused. In the absence of any basis or foundation laid, the entire case against an officer of the Indian Administration Service would seriously jeopardize his career, his reputation and that of his wife as well. Therefore, the learned Senior Advocate would vehemently seek to urge that the proceedings be stayed as there is no foundation laid for the prosecution of the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 7,9,12,13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and that the proceedings have been hanging fire from the past eight months and the petitioner has faced untold misery in having to face the ignominy of these pending proceedings and as there is no basis for the prosecution, the same ought to be quashed.
2. However, the proceedings are apparently at a nascent stage and the charge sheet is yet to be filed. If the final report has been prepared and if the matter is taken forward, the petitioner would certainly have the opportunity of seeking 6 discharge and if he is able to demonstrate that there is no basis for the allegations against him or his wife, the petitioner and his wife could very well seek discharge on that ground alone. Since the petitioner and his wife are high ranking officials, the pending proceedings ought not to be delayed, if there is remedy available to the petitioners to absolve themselves at the earliest. This should be facilitated or rather the petitioners should be heard on the merits of their case for such discharge at the earliest.
Hence, the only relief that could be granted to the petitioner is to direct the court below to hasten the proceedings and to expedite the proceedings so that the petitioners could have the opportunity of demonstrating their case for discharge.
The petitions stand disposed of in terms as above.
Sd/-
JUDGE nv