Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

Karnataka High Court Passes Common Order in Multiple Section 482 CrPC Petitions Seeking Quashing of FIRs in Alleged Corruption Case. The Accused, Including Public Servants, Argue That the Private Complaints Filed by an Advocate-RTI Activist and Resulting FIRs Are Without Basis and Seek to Invoke Inherent Jurisdiction.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-11-01 11:19:17
  • 328
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010193922014_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (KAR) (10) 3

Criminal Petition Nos. 2442/2014, 2576/2014, 3011/2014, 3012/2014, 3052/2014, 2522/2014, 2503/2014, 2523/2014, 3263/2014, 2577/2014, 3054/2014, 3053/2014 and 2990/2014

2014-10-28

K.N. Phaneendra

S.M. Chandrashekara (Senior Counsel for petitioners), Malipatil P.S. (Advocate for petitioners), Venkatesh P. Dalwai (for R1), Bahubali A. Danawade (Special PP for R1), R. Shashidhara (Advocate for R2)

K.C. Ramesh, Manjunath Swamy, K.C. Puroshotham, B.M.S. Veeraiah, Shantappa, S. Rajeshekar, Dinesh Kumar B.C.

State of Karnataka through Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lokayukta, Chitradurga and B.S. Prabhakar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking to quash FIRs and referral orders passed by the trial court in private complaints alleging corruption.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners, who are accused in two PCR cases, seek quashing of the impugned orders dated 25-02-2014 and 10-03-2014 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, and the consequent FIRs registered by the Lokayukta police.

Filing Reason

The complainant, B.S. Prabhakar, an advocate and RTI activist, filed two private complaints against the petitioners and others, alleging corruption. The trial court referred the complaints leading to FIRs. The petitioners contend that the orders and FIRs are illegal and abuse of process of law.

Previous Decisions

The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga passed orders in PCR No. 1/2014 on 25-02-2014 and PCR No. 2/2014 on 10-03-2014, presumably directing investigation or taking cognizance. No previous decision on merits is recorded.

Judgment Excerpts

In all the above criminal petitions, common question of facts and law are involved. Therefore, all the criminal petitions are taken up together for disposal and a common order is passed in order to avoid repetition of facts, as well the legal aspects. A person by name Sri B.S. Prabhakar, complainant before the Trial Court, claiming himself to be an RTI activist and also practicing Advocate having lot of concern towards the society, in order to eradicate the corruption as far as possible, has filed the complaint

Procedural History

B.S. Prabhakar, an advocate and RTI activist, filed two private complaints (PCR Nos. 1/2014 and 2/2014) before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, alleging corruption against the petitioners and others. On 25-02-2014 and 10-03-2014, the trial court passed orders referring the complaints to the Lokayukta police, who subsequently registered FIRs on 01-03-2014 and 18-03-2014. The petitioners, as accused, filed the instant batch of petitions under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court seeking quashing of the referral orders and FIRs.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Lokayukta corruption private complaint RTI activist advocate complainant criminal petition

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Bank Employee in Disciplinary Proceedings — Jurisdiction Validated Post-Service Extension. 2026-11-02 02:42:38
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State's Petition Challenging KAT Order in Land Regularization Case. Court upholds regularization of unauthorized occupation under Section 94 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, finding no error in Tribunal's order. 2026-11-02 02:42:38
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition murder natural justice acquittal compensation burden of proof land acquisition limitation Jurisdiction Article 226
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Upholds Developer's Challenge to Arbitration Award — ...

High Court Quashes School Tribunal's Order on Employee Reinstatement Due to Procedural Irr...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Accused in IPC Sections 376, 420, 493, 494, and 495 Case...

Supreme Court Restores Appellate Tribunal's Order on Tariff Determination Due to Breach of...

Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Challenge to High Court Orders in Civil Appeal — Legal...

Lost Your Password?