BENGALURU: In a setback to the Karnataka Lokayukta, a special court held that the report of the investigation indicating that ‘prima facie evidence regarding the involvement of former minister and incumbent MLA H K Patil, is not forthcoming from the evidence produced along with the complaint and related correspondence within the Lokayukta’ is neither barred under the Indian Evidence Act nor the Right to Information Act from providing it to the complainant, as claimed by the Lokayukta.
The Lokayukta investigating officer submitted the report to the special court into the allegations of corruption, money laundering and misuse of power in passing an order exempting all commercial solar power generators from paying wheeling and banking charges and cross-subsidy surcharge for 10 years when HK Patil was RDPR minister in 2014.
Directing the Karnataka Lokayukta to furnish the details sought in Sl. No.1, 4 to 9 at para-19 of application dated January 9, 2026 (filed by the complainant) under Section 91 of the CrPC, to challenge the status report filed by the Lokayukta police on March 21, 2025, Judge Shivaprasad K B, the Special Court for trial of the criminal cases against sitting and former MPs/MLAs, said that the objection of complainant, Abraham T J, to the report submitted to the police inspector of Karnataka Lokayukta, is sustained.
The special court said that Section 124 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that the public officer shall not be compelled to disclose the communications made to him in official confidence where he considers that the public interest would suffer by such disclosure.
The Lokayukta police report merely states that the details are internal official communications and therefore, protected under Section 124 of the Act. Therefore, there is no ground to deny the complainant in furnishing the said details.