Karnataka: SC to hear graft cases against Yediyurappa on Feb 28

New Delhi, Jan 17 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday set February 28 to hear pleas in corruption cases against former Karnataka chief minister B S Yediyurappa accused of de-notifying land to benefit private parties.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said it needed to adjudicate the legal question whether a second complaint should be lodged against a former public servant for commission of alleged offence while in office even after the dismissal of the first complaint for lack of prosecution sanction.

Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Yediyurappa, said the Karnataka high court could not have ordered restoring the criminal case against the former CM and others as under the 2018 amendment of the Prevention of Corruption Act, a sanction was still needed.

He told the bench that initially a private complaint was filed by A Alam Pasha in 2012 alleging de-notifying a parcel of acquired land to benefit private parties, when Yediyurappa was the chief minister in his first term.

The 2012 complaint was dismissed by the court on the ground that there was no prior sanction to prosecute the BJP leader and the order had attained finality.

Luthra said in 2014, a second complaint was filed, similar to the first one, when Yediyurappa demitted office but the trial court in 2016 dismissed it for need of prior sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

He said the high court on January 5, 2021 partly allowed Pasha's petition and set aside the August 26, 2016 order of the additional city civil and sessions judge related to three of the four accused, including Yediyurappa, dismissing the complaint against them.

The high court restored the criminal complaint in the files of the trial court, he said.

Luthra said the high court said the quashing of the previous complaint for want of sanction would not act as a bar to maintain the latest complaint filed in 2014 after the respondents demitted office.

The bench said there were a number of cases listed for hearing and it was unable to differentiate the facts of each case.

It asked Luthra to frame the question of laws in the petitions and file short submissions on each case.

The senior counsel said there were five sets of cases involving Yediyurappa, of which the lead case arose from the January 5, 2021 order of the high court.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the Karnataka government, said since the court would be dealing with the question of law, it should also be made a party and allowed to make submissions.

Luthra opposed the state government's plea saying the case stemmed from a private complaint and the state had no role to play in it.

The bench, however, allowed the Karnataka government to make submissions, but only on the question of law.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), also sought permission to address the court which was allowed.

A total of nine petitions, involving Yediyurappa, were listed for hearing but one was withdrawn on the ground it had become infructuous.

On January 27, 2021, the top court protected Yediyurappa and former minister for industries Murugesh Nirani, from arrest in the case pertaining to alleged forgery over withdrawal of approval for a parcel of land in the state.

In his appeal, Yediyurappa argued one of the questions of law was whether a court could proceed under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against a public servant without prior sanction on the ground that he had allegedly demitted the office which he allegedly abused, in view of the amended provisions of Section 19 of the PC Act.

Being aggrieved of the January 5, 2021 verdict, Yediyurappa said high court had "erroneously" allowed the petition filed by Pasha under Section 482 CrPC and set aside a well-reasoned order of August 26, 2016, passed by the special judge who dismissed the complaint for want of the requisite prior sanction.

It said the same was contrary to the settled law laid down by the top court in several judgements and the provisions of the amended PC Act.

Yediyurappa said Pasha waited for him to demit office before submitting the complaint which was a complete abuse of the process of law. The high court, he argued, by permitting the complainant to adopt a device to circumvent the statutory protection afforded to a public servant, rendered the protection illusory. PTI