BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court remitted to the trial court 115 cases involving misappropriation of crores of rupees by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) officials and civil contractors while executing works between 2005-06 and 2011-12. The high court wants the trial court to consider the cases afresh.
Justice HP Sandesh passed the order, allowing the criminal revision petitions filed by the state government against the discharge of all officials and contractors by the trial court.
“The high court quashed the proceedings and reserved liberty to the State to proceed against the accused persons to obtain the sanction and time-bound direction was given to consider the sanction.
The State also placed on record the sanction given in some of the cases and also rejection in some of the cases as contended by the counsel of the accused.
The trial court committed an error in interdicting the proceedings without allowing the prosecution to lead further evidence including secondary evidence, as well as only for non-production of the original TVCC report, the proceedings were interdicted and the procedure adopted by the trial court is unknown to law,” the judge said.
The trial court discharged officials and contractors from the cases in 2023, on the ground that the prosecution failed to produce the original copy of the Technical Vigilance Committee Cell (TVCC) report. The state government filed the revision petition, stating that the discharge of the accused is contrary to evidence and material on record and the impugned orders should be set aside.
“All the criminal revision petitions are allowed. The orders passed by the trial court in all the cases are set aside. The matters are remitted back to the trial court to consider the matter afresh in view of the observations made by this court on merits,” the high court said. It directed the trial court to consider the sanction order given by the state to continue with the proceedings against the accused.
But if no such sanction is given, there can be no proceedings against the accused. In the absence of the original TVCC report, if any secondary evidence is placed and if it is admissible and reliable, the trial court has to permit the prosecution to place on record all the material and then dispose of the matter on merits in accordance with law, the court said.
The state government contended that the trial court had passed an order on the sustainability of the chargesheet after the trial commenced, which is impermissible in law.
The trial court, which had already rejected the application filed by the accused seeking discharge from the case, passing the orders suo motu to discharge them invoking the provisions of Sections 227 and 239 of CrPC does not arise, it said.