EN THE HIGH COUR? $12′ KARNATAKA AT BANGAIQRE
DATED THIS ’21:}: 1am DAY OF DECEMBERf’53€:Tf3]t’.Gf¥”,4″
?RESEN’1′ X N
THE HGNBLE 1\rIR.JUSfiEICE4NAfI§:IVii§}L§VL}i??,_
MD . . ..
THE HON’BLE MR.
WRIT PETITION’ 1s:;o:.33 i)5e§”%%I<;g§f"%'2oo9:'(GM:i{LA)
BETWEEN:
Sri.Sa;m0s.1'1 _ S/0 Shivaji Q Major, 34 Yea}?-§s,"_4«..V"~V1'__ V ' Member sf K2z1*;j1at.aif:a -- '
L<%gis1aiéve-:"1'iss§:fii1.1)1yiii: "
I'Cr1.nanei1i R<:..;*-_;i.aé"n.i;V_ C» if % ' < – .
Sandur, V' _ V _
Pres<~:I1_t1y resicling 21:1: V'
N 0.520, Arnru't -.Ni"w"E1SJ.:
7m Mam; %13m C zms;
RMV Si#ag&A 11111 M \\
4»;-g;_gg. .. PETITIONER.
A my }3:’:»§i3.}Y:_1ii__:1.g .Pi.1¥E;-:2r2s.<§g;gi, fluiv.)
L Afifii %
VA T _ '_ 44 H Thx: I-2€:giS1.rar.
‘ .. ;%{21.rrj1z-fi:;1.}<21 I;0k21y:1%s'."i',2.»1,
" V _N£a.:1tist'§*i:::(1 131.2 %__}.<ii_r:g.:S,
_ V "D-1".E33.R.A:n.'l)<:<'§.Rar V{',{'2{fi 1:1,
BANGALQRE — 530 9%}.
{xi
2. Sri .A. Ne.1;2fa1ya2′:assx/Vzm’:;.f,
S / 0 81*; A. I321};-:.:’1§”1z-2..,
ME1j().ET,
Rcsidcm 0!” Nc>.236,
Kas}1.i.:1a1g{21I, ~
Ka.r1akais:21pura M2k’iI’} Road, V
Yelachenahalii, -._ _ ”
BANGALORE — 560 978.,’ RraSIrQNDi?:NTS;’%,
(By Sri.B.A.Bei}iyappa, Adv. .1,
Notice to R2 is h€2i(‘I :s;.zf’f§cie;1£;} ‘
V ‘;g;–_V§~g,$A_;;%*_§g:.k
‘I’§’1is P<éi';i*iii(3)'I:i."%:§§:VZ'fiicézfi L]gE'1-%_éi':€'TI""A%%:i.(T1C.$V:i22€3 and 227 of the
Clorzstimtiora } 1t.i'2§s}V';'t,}1e order a': AImcxu1'(:é
M "Ti" '-§a},z.VtE11<3 Horfbie Lokayukta in
Karnatalég st-atzé V :.()K/G.L13/ 1.30/2(_)O7/ARE–2;
to hold gsroceedings ieading to the filing
of the r_:G'mL})1ai'nt..,VAAby* R~t1' t§e:£b.re the Court of VH1 Additional
.f CEv1i.eA.f V-ix/'iE:t,ropeJ:1ta1-IMag5's::.rax_c, m ('I.C3.N0.11494/2008, as a
n'11J1"i_V§#:y '*iT:1f"-v.i_:'E'%:{i"~ of $33.5; ami to (:;ua.sh the ()rd(-rr dated
V 28.(}'5h.2={)().8 'by me (fu3’t: 0%’ W11″ Ad<'hi.i4:mal C}1i€if
M<%t?0;5i:3Ei1':é:::_ }y'Es;1gisf.r2-,a'<*, E;%a.z:_§_{2-:i<:a:'<:, in (3.C.F'~§<). "I. .E.4»9-ii/2(_)O8.
, 'I'%1:«is P<:i',ié'.'ic)n is <_:€:m§ng 051 for P§'(-t1§IIli,i3Ei'i."y i'i'<:ari'i'1_,<_',{ this;
__ 'day;§t11ur’i. mails $1112? £'<si§0'Wi'ng:
to cause or cor1ewe*.:__er, r1eit}’ie1′:i;t1e partr1ers.h.ip firm nor the Hotel business
ever eorariieneed. Ir: i’;’1e rneanwhisiet, a suit. had been flied
6
before the Court of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) at l”i()s15r:t, in
O.S.No.6/2007 for declaration that the plaintiffs..~are.ent;itl.Cgi
to a joint family property. In the said suit,
at1–inte11’rn injunction had been granted if
to make any encumbrance .over tlr1Ae.”’prope1’31:y.f . In
circumstances, neither the pairt_nc.rship” Vgnor ever
commenced nor it undertook_any;;_aVctiVii;jn created any asset
or incurred any liability. ‘n»e:l’}.rrn._irs ‘p.’i*_ac”ti(;ally’ defunct with
no activity.
4. corisitiered the said statement
filed on behalf of the -ioetitiorier and was of the opinion when
once the “fact of ‘1i.r1t’ere.st in M/S.NagaIjuna Residency is
the tleclaratiorr filed, prima facie declaration
filed a “false declaration, there is omission, whether it was
accidehiital-..’or’intentional or there is Inens rea are all matters
if”4§¢hiclt1__are”‘to be gone into at the time of enquiry and not at
stage. Therefore over ruling the said objection, he
“proceeded to pass an order unrier Section 14 of
the Act, directed ir1.itiai.ion oi” prosecution of the peiriti-orier.
Aggrieved by the said order of IeIon’b1e I.oi{ayio1}ii.a,..~i~1.i(f;
writ petition is filed.
5. It is submitted by the learned
that before filing this writ ;)etitio1i:ipetitioii. it
under Section 482 of . coded flgrocedure,
challenging the order oi taking
cognizance of the oifi”e1iice:=A.a11:ti However, the
same was p’i:ei’erred this writ petition
chailenginti th’eVVVI;ion’b1e Lokayukta as well
as the proceedings Vinitiated.___he:iore the learned Magistrate.
‘ en
Lea11r_1iAed.Vp_couris’e.1…appearing for the petitioner contended
that”eizen”£f_’the~ inforniation furnished is incorrect, there is an
omission, it deies’; not amount to furnishing a false inforrmation
and theiefcsre initiation of prosecution is not automatic.
“-ip3is~::ret’ion is conferred on the i-iorfbie Lokayukta in the given
Vsetaof facts not to i.ni_tiai:e criminal proceedings even after
it ioeirig satisfied that there is on1issi_on. The Horfbie Loisiayukta
has not appreciated this legal position and he goesfio the
extent of saying that he wouid not Consider his obj;ef(;’tioi”i;
therefore the order passed by I-lon’ble_”
erroneous. contrary to law, contrary to.ithe’,DiVi’sion»._Beif1eh ‘
Judgment of this Court and st.l-‘:..erefoi”~e_ the ssfdljtjriits
requires to be set aside. He i’ui”tlfieif fthagt the case
Could not have filed under”-§iecAtioti2.j_»if?’?V– and as such the
impugned order cannot be”sus§tair:ed, ‘ ”
7. We are tlheilearned counsel for the
petitioner; otilllfecord. it is clear that the
petitioner iega e%Mer:.iherlVtsf:’i€.:irna.takz1 Legislative Assembly.
Under 4§Sectio1i.V he has to furnish the full
tolmstibmit. to the Herfble Lokayukta in the
:foVi}iiiv.l’V’a”‘stateriiente. of his assets and liabiiity and
V those of the niemliers of the family. It is in pursuance of the
“V,’§t.atuto_ryVyohiigation, he has filed a statement of his assets
-ajiid-:1’iahili_ty in the prescribed form. It is admitted in the said
Wstlatement that he has not mentioned his interest in the
aware that he is a partner in M/s.Nagarjuna Resideripcyg. In
the information, which he has furnished he l1as~«~~sett
firms, in which he has interest. However he didnriotl Choose’ to
mention the name of M / s.Naga1juna_ ‘
had interest in the said statem.c’nt__.. a
said information, the is not
true. Therefore, prirna Section 177 of
IPC is made out_ar1_d is -under an
obligation to public servant, if he is
satisfied t_h-at committed any criminal
offence. Jlfiection 14 mandates that the
public servar1t._Vlsh_oVu1dVbeuiprosecuted in a Court of law for
‘sucli After«the.vHon’b1e Lokayukta is being satisfied
aboutl t;i’*1,e”‘com’rriission of offence prima facie, no discretion is
leftilillhthe not to prosecute the public servant,
-..l,l’_j’:v..«..because language employed in Section 14 is emphatic, it
mariclatory, Lokayukta should prosecute the public
A perusal of the order of the Lokayukta clearly
«discloses that he has taken note of the allegations in the
ii/i
11
complaint. He has also taken into consideration the
statement filed by the petitioner and the facts
and he was of the view that once the thatul
there is a omission to mention the afotes~aj”d._” the ‘
statement of particulars fl,l1’1’liF3:h’-id the
furnished by him is not ‘true, it was
intentional, whether ther§$lii”wafi§:~. give false
information or it is:’a__ error or he
was ill advised,«is considered at the
time of ,it1’ia1_u°ar1d’1qtherefore declined to drop the
proceedings. ” ‘When? has exercised his power
strictly uddthexl ” comers of law and in particular
Sectiti oncev.h_e.»is satisfied about the statement filed
by’ the is not true, which satisfaction is based on
the.’ iilcontained in the statement filed by the
petitionerkhimself, he has no discretion to drop the
A ‘proceedirigs or not to initiate criminal prosecution.
8. Ir} t’:1_1a.t View i)E’1hc m2:.i’.¥’.(‘.é.1f, it is not. possib1(;*, to ‘c1<:(:cp1.
tlzai. ?,.1}(": order }')23.s';s.'ec"%<'i by ma? Lok2.1yuk*;.a is (.'.1'I'().I'lC{)1.1S Elfld
:
stzlfersa from ini”im’:_§fiy, ‘L*J§2§{‘E}’1 (:2.11Is”s Em” ‘inl.c1″1’c*re’r’1.(:<*..
(3(.;:1_s(:qu:':m1y., the p'r()se{:<',:.1:é<}r3 §am2(_%E'1<:('§. 's:':~{*.1'1°&: ‘..’E.'(.%;(fiIl{r:(1
.M2-1g’ist.rat{: is also si.:*i<':i.i};* 1;: a<:«:':r<:le11T1(:e xx;*if'._§1':–.Iav§*'- —–ti';;f:
Magistrate has not c03.'I'2:I:iE.t..(é{i razxy _(,'."EI'.£V'e'.')_1_'4 in_'i_;1.kir'1g<:dgf1ize1:V1{§é . '
of the oiiferace and isstlingg jpr<)f’t}3e’ ;.:gf0.céed’1::tgé.
9. It) is mack-: cliragr tE1g:a”j’£’~..1h<'-2' .EA<iéL.r:1§<':;-3M;ag;s:r;1r'e"si1a11 decide
the zriaiiiiztr 0:2 mer1?i'.:€'s :42.:':i'{i::;.1~:;;_’3V€:».§=ai:’.’§_1 iawv, withisut in
any Way i;11i’§”é’ €:::.<§""*2?:z:'y of the {)bsm'"v2:1t'i(Jr2 '§_I18LdG by
tlzés Court "in." *£§..1is. 1:12';-réfE,.{.:;2'." '
.–10. I»1"£–.,t,11z§;t View "(:s–f.t'§__1§;.:;'2;»aéier, i.;fh<::r<: is no 1"'i7;Cfi.'§.. _{):7sm§sse(3.
3&5-4
EUDGE
55;"
§UDG§