Case Note & Summary
Background: The petitioner, as President of Lanchamukta Karnataka Vedike, filed a private complaint under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 2(1)(h) of BNSS before the Special Court, alleging irregularities in allotment of a civic amenity site to Siddharatha Vihar Trust by the Bangalore Development Authority. The complaint alleged that the Trust, though not exclusively for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, falsely claimed SC/ST status to obtain a 50% concession in lease amount and an alternative site, facilitated by undue influence of a Union Minister and connivance of public servants. The complainant had earlier filed complaints with the jurisdictional police (High Grounds Police Station) on 21-01-2025 and the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta on 30-01-2025, but no FIR was registered. He also sought approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 from the Governor on 30-07-2025. The Special Court, by order dated 11-08-2026, declined to refer the matter for investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS and instead directed an enquiry under Section 223 BNSS. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present criminal petition under Section 528 BNSS challenging that order. The petitioner's senior counsel argued that allegations of corruption require investigation by a specialized agency; the court below erred in choosing an enquiry. Respondent No.1 (Karnataka Lokayukta) fairly submitted that the allegations do concern corruption and would require investigation. The High Court framed the issue whether the Special Court should have ordered enquiry under Section 223 or followed Section 175(3). The provided text does not include the final decision of the High Court.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the concerned Court was right in ordering an enquiry by the Court itself under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) or had to follow the procedure under Section 175(3) of the BNSS in a private complaint alleging corruption?
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (08) 66
Criminal Petition No. 12406 of 2026
Smt. Lakshmy Iyengar, Sri Nagesh Vinay S., Sri Venkatesh S. Arbatti
Sri Vijayaraghava Marathe
The State of Karnataka by Karnataka Lokayuktha, Bengaluru; Shri Mallikarjun Kharge; Sri Radhakrishna; Smt. Radhabai M Kharge; Shri Rahul M. Kharge; Shri Priyank M. Kharge
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 challenging an order of the Special Court in a private complaint alleging corruption in allotment of a civic amenity site.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the order dated 11-08-2026 passed by the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in PCR No.28/2025, insofar as it directed an enquiry under Section 223 BNSS instead of referring the complaint for investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS.
Filing Reason
The Special Court declined to refer the private complaint for investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS and instead chose to conduct an enquiry under Section 223 BNSS, which the petitioner considered erroneous because the allegations involved corruption by public servants requiring investigation by a specialized agency.
Previous Decisions
The Special Court order dated 11-08-2026 in PCR No.28/2025 directing enquiry under Section 223 BNSS; earlier complaints to High Grounds Police Station on 21-01-2025 and to Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta on 30-01-2025 did not result in FIR; the petitioner also submitted an application to the Governor under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 30-07-2025.
Issues
Whether the Special Court was right in ordering an enquiry by the Court itself under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, or whether it ought to have followed the procedure under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, when the complaint alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel argued that allegations of corruption, abuse of public office, and conferment of benefits contrary to norms require investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS; the Special Court cannot appropriately unravel such allegations by conducting an enquiry itself; the allegations require collection of official records, examination of the allotment process, and identification of roles of public servants; procedural requirements like affidavit are not grounds to steer the complaint into an enquiry under Section 223 BNSS; the court below misdirected itself on facts and law.
Respondent No.1 (Karnataka Lokayukta) fairly submitted that the allegations in the complaint do concern acts of corruption and the role attributed to public servants; such allegations would appropriately require investigation; beyond this, the counsel left the matter to the court's decision.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner/complainant is before this Court calling in question an order dated 11-08-2026 in P.C.R.No.28 of 2025 passed by the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, insofar as it does not direct taking the route of Section 175 of the BNSS but, chooses the route of conducting an enquiry under Section 223 of the BNSS.
whether the concerned Court was right in ordering an enquiry by the Court itself under 223 of the BNSS or had to follow the procedure under Section 175(3) of the BNSS.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a complaint before the jurisdictional Police (High Grounds Police Station) on 21-01-2025 alleging irregularities in allotment of a civic amenity site to Siddharatha Vihar Trust. No FIR was registered. He then filed a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta on 30-01-2025, which also met with no response. On 30-07-2025, he submitted an application to the Governor seeking approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Subsequently, he registered a private complaint in PCR No.28/2025 before the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, seeking reference of the matter for investigation under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. By order dated 11-08-2026, the Special Court declined to refer the complaint for investigation and instead directed that it would conduct an enquiry under Section 223 BNSS. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present criminal petition under Section 528 BNSS before the High Court of Karnataka.
Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Section 528, Section 175(3), Section 223, Section 2(1)(h)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: Section 314, Section 316, Section 336, Section 61
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Section 13(1)(a), Section 13(1)(b), Section 17A
- Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Civic Amenity Sites) Rules, 1989: Rule 3(2)
