DA case: Karnataka High Court raps Lokayukta police, says its process a mockery of law
BENGALURU: Terming the entire process initiated by the Lokayukta police as a mockery of law, the Karnataka High Court quashed the First Information Report (FIR) registered by them on April 21, 2023, against K L Gangadharaiah, Assistant Director of Town Planning, Yelahanka Zone, BBMP, in connection with a disproportionate assets case.
The court, however, granted liberty to the Lokayukta police to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order while allowing the petition filed by Gangadharaiah questioning the registration of the FIR.
The court observed that it is not understandable as to why the Lokayukta police are in a mortal hurry in certain cases, particularly of disproportionate assets (DA). It would be an altogether different circumstance if it was a case of trapping where it has to be done immediately and discretely. These are cases of DA. A properly drawn source information report would always be a guiding light throughout the prosecution or investigation in the least, the court said.
“The responsibility of an institution like the Lokayukta to curb the menace of corruption cannot also be ignored. Therefore, it is for the Lokayukta police not to let loose any loophole, of the kind that is projected in the case at hand in a case of launching of prosecution for DA. The very object of registration of crime is whittled away, by such a course of procedural aberration,” the court observed.
Pointing out the lapses, the court observed that the action of the Lokayukta police does not inspire confidence of the court as there was no authorisation to the investigating officer by the SP to register the crime. The original records that are produced by the Lokayukta police also do not indicate any such order being passed by the SP, the court added.
Faulty check period
The court further said the records demonstrate that the Lokayukta police sought to initiate proceedings in haste. The source information report was drawn on April 21, 2023, and the crime was registered on the same day. The check period is depicted to be from the beginning of the career of the petitioner, which would be 1993. The petitioner is even now working and has drawn salary for the month of March 2023. The clock of the check period, in the source information report, stops at December 31, 2015, eight years prior to the registration of crime in 2023, which is not understandable, the court noted.