S.M. RAJU Vs. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court assailing the report dated 11.12.2003 at Annexure-A to the petition. The petitioner has also contended that the first respondent does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

(2.) The brief facts are that in respect of certain allegations against the petitioner, a preliminary investigation was held by the first respondent and a report under Section 12 (3) of the Karnataka Lokayuktha Act, 1984 (for short the 'K.L. Act') was made. The complaint had been initiated by one Sri A.N.Rajanna, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayuktha on 26.07.2003. Accordingly, a preliminary investigation was held and in the said proceedings before the first respondent, prior to the recommendation dated 11.12.2003 being made, the statements recorded on behalf of the witnesses was also taken into consideration. The details relating to the nature of allegations made, the manner in which the proceedings were held and the documents that were looked into is referred to in the report.

(3.) At the outset, what is necessary to be noticed is also that the said report was in respect of two officers named therein. In respect of Sri Shivalingamurthy, this Court has already considered the writ petition in W.P.No.44842/2003 and the same has been disposed of on 23.02.2007 rejecting the contentions putforth in the writ petition. A copy of the order is filed before this Court. A perusal of the same would indicate, with regard to the manner in which the proceedings was held and the investigation being conducted by Sri A.N.Rajanna, Deputy Superintendant of Police, it has been adverted to in detail and no fault has been found. Hence, to the said extent, certainly when it is in respect of a common report, the same would be applicable to the instant facts as well.