Karnataka High Court
Durgappa S/O. Ramappa Ganiger vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 April, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
WP No. 148673 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 148673 OF 2020 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. DURGAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA GANIGER
AGE. 41 YEARS,
OCC. SERVICE,
R/O. H.NO.23,
TEACHERS COLONY,
SHAHU NAGAR,
BELAGAVI
2. LAKHAN S/O PARASHRAM NAIK
AGE. 26 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. C/O. SMT.MAHADEVI NAYAK,
1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
SHIVAJI NAGAR
BELAGAVI.
3. SACHIN S/O. SURESH SHIVANAGEKAR
AGE. 40YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. H.NO.255, 4TH CROSS,
RAMANAGAR,
VN KANGRALI K.H.
BADIGER
BELAGAVI.
Digitally signed
by V N BADIGER
Date: 2022.04.17
15:08:45 +0530
4. SHANKAR S/O RAMAPPA KADAKOL
AGE. 24 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. C/O. DAULAT HANUMANT RAO KATAKAR
B-CTS-7140, SIDNAL CROSS,
BELAGAVI.
-2-
WP No. 148673 of 2020
5. CHANDRAPPA S/O. ARJUN METRI
AGE. 33 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. 2ND CROSS,
BEHIND SAI MANDIR,
SHIVAJI NAGAR
BELAGAVI.
6. GANAPPA S/O BASAPPA SHILAVANTAR
AGE. 27 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. H.NO.179 MUTAWAD
TQ. SOUNDATTI,
DIST.BELAGAVI.
7. NITIN S/O ASHOK KALPATRI
AGE. 39 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. H.NO.626,
AMBEDKAR GALLI,
MACHHE,
DIST.BELAGAVI.
8. MITHUN S/O MAHADVE BARIGIDED
AGE. 23 YEARS,
OCC. SERVICE,
R/O. H.NO.78,
NOGANIHAL
TQ. HUKKERI
DIST.BELAGAVI.
9. AKSHATA S/O ASHOK BAILWAD
AGE. 37 YEARS,
OCC. CONTRACT WORKER,
R/O. PLOT NO.21,
SUKSHANTI BLDG.,
SAI COLONY,
2ND CROSS,
ANAND NAGAR,
VADGAON,
-3-
WP No. 148673 of 2020
DIST.BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHETANA S. BIRAJ.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU,
BELAGAVI
NOW REPRESENT BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROCUTER
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH DHARWAD.
2 THE ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, BELAGAVI
NOW REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH,
DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R1.,
SRI.SANOTSH MALAGOUDAR, ADV., FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE FIR DTD 24.6.2020 IN CRIME
NO.9/2020 IN ANTI- CORRUPTION BUREAU, BELAGAVI FOR THE
OFFENSE PUNISHABLE U/S.7(A) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION
ACT, 1988 AT ANNEXURE-B.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS
DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWIONG:
-4-
WP No. 148673 of 2020
ORDER
Suo motu first information was registered by the respondent - Anti Corruption Bureau against the petitioners- accused who are employees of the Karnataka Maharishi Valmiki Schedule Tribe Development Corporation Limited, Belagavi (for short the Corporation), alleging that they are involved in taking gratification from the beneficiaries under the various schemes. Thereafter, on the permission granted by the learned Magistrate, search was conducted in the office of the corporation, wherein certain amount is said to have recovered in the office of the petitioners herein. Hence, this petition.
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that in the absence of the any demand or acceptance or demand to obtain gratification to perform a public duty, the registration of the first information report against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short the Act) is not permissible. In the absence of sanction granting permission to the respondent- Anti Corruption Bureau to prosecute the petitioners for the -5- WP No. 148673 of 2020 aforesaid offence, the registration of first information report against the petitioners is without authority of law.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that various complaints were received from the beneficiaries regarding the corrupt practice in distrusting the funds under the various schemes. Upon search conducted by the respondent- Anti Corruption Bureau, the amount is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Hence, he submits that registration of the first information report of FIR against the petitioners is in accordance with provisions of the said Act.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for parties.
5. To constitute offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Act there must be acceptance from any person for himself or for another person, or gratification for any person in discharge of his public duties. In the present case, first information report was registered against the petitioners only because certain amount was recovered from the possession of the petitioners and the same cannot be said that the petitioners -6- WP No. 148673 of 2020 have committed offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Act. In the absence of any corroborative material, the registration of first information report against the petitioners is impermissible.
6. Section 17A of the Act specifies that no police officer shall conduct any inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under this Act without the previous approval of the disciplinary authority .In the present case, there is no prior approval granted by the competent authority for launching criminal prosecution act against the petitioners as specified under Section 17A of the Act. Hence, the registration of FIR without prior sanction is without authority of law Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The Criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.9/2020 registered by the Anti Corruption Bureau, -7- WP No. 148673 of 2020 Belagavi pending before the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE VB