IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2358 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
1. PUTTA SHETTY S/O SADANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS THE PRESENT TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, BELTHANAGADY BELTHANGADY TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-571249.
2. LINGAYYA S/O KENGAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS TAHSILDAR GRADE ‘B’ TALUK OFFICE, BELTHANAGADY BELTHANGADY TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-571249.
3. GOVINDA NAIK S/O LATE ESHWARA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SECTION CLERK TALUK OFFICE BELTHANGADY BELTHANGADY TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-571249.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: G.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND A C KURIAN S/O LATE K V CHACKO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT SARA FARMS SHIBAJE VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADY TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA-571249.
(BY SRI: S RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) ... RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO:
1)QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN P.C.NO.1/2015 ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. SESSIONS AND SPL. JUDGE, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA BASED ON THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT UNDER SECTIONS 7, 8, 9, 13 OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 R/W SECTIONS 207,418,465,466,467,468,471,474 R/W 34 OF IPC. 2)QUASH THE ORDER DATED 6.1.2015 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. SESSIONS AND SPL. JUDGE, DAKSHINA KANNADA., MANGALORE IN PC NO.1/2015 THEREBY REGISTERING THE CASE AS PC AND REFERRING THE MATTER TO SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE LOKAYUKTHA, DAKSHINA KANNADA UNDER SECTION 156(3) OF CR.P.C. FOR INVESTIGATION.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the respondent is absent.
2. The main ground urged by the petitioners seeking quashing of the impugned proceedings is that the requisite sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is not obtained prior to registration of the case against the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners’ submits that as per the averments made in the complaint, the petitioners herein viz., accused Nos.1 to 3 were Public Servants as defined under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The allegations made in the private complaint prima-facie indicate that the alleged acts were committed by the petitioners in the course of discharge of their official duty and hence the prosecution of the petitioners without prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is illegal and has vitiated the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioners.
4. The allegations made in the complaint are that the Taluk Office, Belthangadi had earlier received four applications for grant of Government Land situate in Shibaje Village, Belthangadi in NCR 105/91-92, NCR 107/91-92, NCR 323/91-92 and NCR 109/91-92. The then Tahsildhar had made an endorsement rejecting the said applications on account of the objection raised by the Forest Department. Inspite of knowing the said fact, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 herein in connivance with accused No.4, by receiving illegal gratification, put up the application NCR 109/91-92 filed by respondent No.4 for grant of government land, without bringing to the notice of the Committee for regularization of Unauthorised Occupation of the Government Land., the endorsement made by the Tahsildhar and thereby facilitated grant of 2.53 acres of land to accused No.4.
5. The alleged acts on the face of it appear to have been committed by the petitioners in discharge of their official duty. Therefore, in my view, without prior sanction as required under Section 197 Cr.P.C., the prosecution could not have been launched against the petitioners. In that view of the matter, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in P.C.No.1/2015 pending on the file of III Addl.
Sessions and Special Judge, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada are quashed only insofar as the petitioners viz., accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 are concerned.
Liberty is reserved to the complainant to proceed against the petitioners after obtaining necessary sanction in accordance with law.
In view of disposal of the main matter, I.A.No.1/2015 for stay does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE *mn/-