Karnataka High Court sets aside order for probe against BJP National General Secretary CT Ravi in corruption case

The Karnataka High Court has partly allowed a petition filed by National General Secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) CT Ravi, seeking to quash proceedings initiated against him on allegations of corruption. .Justice John Michael Cunha quashed and set aside the order dated October 6, 2016, issued by the Special Court under the Prevention of Corruption Act, in a complaint against Ravi. .The case stems from a private complaint filed against Ravi on allegations of corruption. The complainant had sought for the matter to be investigated by the Lokayukta Police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), in the interests of justice. .The Special Court, after considering the allegations made in the complaint, had referred the complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Bengaluru, for investigation..Subsequently, Ravi filed a petition before the High Court on the ground that the procedure followed by the Special Judge was contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court. .Senior Advocate Ashok Haranahalli, appearing for Ravi, submitted that in the absence of any averments made in the complaint to the effect that the complainant has exhausted the remedy under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) and there being no affidavit as mandated, the Special Judge has committed an error in referring the complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. .He also relied on the Supreme Court judgment judgment in Priyanka Srivastava And Another v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Others. .Special Public Prosecutor Jeevan J Neeralgi contended that the complaint was filed in the year 2012, much earlier to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the year 2015. Thus, the principles laid down in the said decision cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. .Further, he submitted that failure to file the affidavit may only amount to a curable irregularity and the same does not amount to an illegality vitiating the impugned order..After hearing the rival submissions, the Court primarily opined that when a specific prayer is made to refer the complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) of CrPC, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava's case will apply..The High Court held that, ."The Hon'ble Supreme Court has mandated that when an application is filed under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C, the same shall be supported by an affidavit, so that the learned Magistrate could verify the truth of the allegations made in the complaint and also to obviate false and irresponsible complaints being filed invoking the jurisdiction of the criminal courts. This direction is binding on all the courts under Article 141 of the Constitution of India."Karnataka High Court.The Court also noted that the instant complaint was filed in the year 2012, and the order of reference was made only in 2016, subsequent to the passing of the judgment by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the impugned order of reference made by the Special Judge cannot be sustained, the Court held.."However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, the above defect is only a curable irregularity which does not vitiate the proceedings initiated against the petitioner. Therefore, an opportunity is required to the complainant to cure the said defects and bring his compliant in conformity with the requirements of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava’s case.".With these observations, the Court set aside the order dated October 6, 2016 and partly allowed Ravi's plea. .While doing so, the Court also granted liberty to the complainant to file a complaint before the Anti-Corruption Bureau if required..[Read judgment here]