MANGALA SHRIDHAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Senior Advocate Shri P.S. Rajagopal appearing for the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri Sandesh J. Chouta appearing for the State.

(2.) The brief facts are that the appellant was appointed as a Member of Karnataka Public Service Commission in the year 201 It transpires that a first information report was lodged by the Deputy Secretary to Government before the Vidhana Soudha police station, Bengaluru on 206.2013 and again on 25.06.2013, after obtaining a legal opinion, the police have registered a case in Crime No.28/2013 for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 418, 420, 465 read with Section 34 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the then Chairman of the Karnataka Public Services Commission and others including the present petitioner. A case was thereafter said to have been transferred to the C.I.D. for investigation. The C.I.D. in turn after a detail investigation filed a final report which was placed before the Governor for its prior sanction to prosecute the petitioner. Pursuant to which the Governor is said to have issued an order that the State may proceed in accordance with law. This was taken as grant of sanction. It transpires that the Governor in turn had granted a sanction to prosecute the petitioner, the court below has then taken cognizance and had issued process to the petitioner. It is in that background that the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) The primary ground urged is that having regard to the possession which the petitioner occupied, the Governor of the State was not the competent authority to grant sanction and it is the power vested with the President of India in terms of Article 317 of the Constitution of India and apart from this other grounds are raised but on this ground alone the petition would have to be allowed.