STATE OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE Vs. S. SUBBEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant - State of Karnataka Lokayukta Police by way of instant appeal has assailed the judgment and order dtd. 16/8/2018 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Criminal Petition No. 4463 of 2018 whereby the High Court has allowed the said petition by discharging the respondent (original petitioner-accused) from the offences charged under Sec. 13(1) (e) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), on the ground that the sanction accorded to prosecute the respondent-accused by the Government was illegal and without jurisdiction.

(2.) The respondent was working as an Executive Engineer in the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board, Mandya Division, Mandya during the period 1983 to 2007. On the basis of the Source Report dtd. 17/12/2007 submitted by the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bengaluru Rural Division, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bengaluru, a case being Crime No. 22 of 2007 (later numbered as Crime No. 62 of 2008) came to be registered against the respondent for the offence under Sec. 13(1)(e) read with Sec. 13(2) of the said Act. It was alleged, inter alia, that the respondent-accused during his tenure in the office as an Executive Engineer had amassed the wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. On the completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer had sent the papers to the State Government seeking sanction to prosecute the respondent as required in Sec. 19(1) of the said Act. The Government of Karnataka on the basis of the material placed before it, had accorded the requisite sanction by issuing the Government order dtd. 13/9/2010. Thereafter the chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru wherein it was alleged that respondent had abused his position as a public servant, had indulged into corrupt practices and had amassed wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. The said case was registered as Special Case No. 488 of 2011 before the said Court.

(3.) The respondent-accused filed an application under Sec. 227 read with 239 of CrPC on 12/10/2011, seeking his discharge from the case contending, inter alia, that neither the contents of the Source Report nor the other documents constituted any offence as alleged, and that the sanction under Sec. 19(1) of the said Act was issued by the Government without any application of mind. The said application came to be dismissed by the trial court by passing a detailed order on 1/2/2013. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent preferred a Criminal Revision Petition being no. 287 of 2013 before the High Court. The said petition came to be disposed of by the High Court vide the order dtd. 5/7/2013 directing the trial court to consider the documents made available by the respondent during the investigation and produced by the prosecution with the chargesheet, while framing the charge without being influenced by the order dtd. 1/12/2013.