Dharmasthala case: High Court directs State to submit its opinion on PIL filed by Kusumavati
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the State government to submit its opinion on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Kusumavati, mother of Soujanya, seeking a direction to the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to register separate FIRs and investigate 74 alleged unnatural deaths reported in Dharmasthala.
The matter came up for hearing before a Bench headed by the Chief Justice. Senior advocate S. Balan appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
The PIL stated that 74 cases of unnatural deaths had been reported within the jurisdiction of a small outpost police station in Dharmasthala village. While the State government had constituted an SIT to investigate these cases, the SIT had registered only a single FIR and failed to register separate FIRs for the remaining cases involving alleged murders, disappearances and deaths.
ALSO READ: Earthquake of magnitude 3.5 hits Bageshwar in Uttarakhand
Arguing before the court, senior advocate S. Balan submitted that the occurrence of 74 unnatural deaths in a small village and conducting a criminal investigation through a single FIR was not a legally proper procedure.
Intervening on behalf of the State, the government counsel submitted that the government had not yet received the relevant records and, without them, it was not possible to place its opinion before the court.
Responding to this, the Chief Justice observed that the issue before the court was clear, that separate FIRs had not been registered in relation to the 74 unnatural deaths. The court directed the State government to obtain the available records from the court and submit its opinion accordingly.
The High Court adjourned the hearing to February 3, when the matter will be taken up for detailed consideration.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC delivers split verdict on Section 17A of PC Act mandating sanction to probe govt servants
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of a 2018 provision of the anti-graft law which mandates prior sanction for initiating a probe against a government servant in a corruption case.
While Justice BV Nagarathna said Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is unconstitutional and needs to be struck down, Justice KV Viswanathan held the provision as constitutional while stressing on the need to protect honest officers.
Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, introduced in July 2018, bars any “enquiry or inquiry or investigation” against a public servant for recommendations made in discharge of official duties without prior approval from the competent authority.
The top court's judgement came on a PIL filed by NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' (CPIL) against the validity of amended section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Requirement of prior sanction is contrary to the Prevention of Corruption Act, forecloses inquiry and protects corrupt, Justice Nagarathna said.
ALSO READ: Snag hits Akasa Air Pune-Bengaluru flight ahead of departure; airline deplanes passengers
"Section 17A is unconstitutional and it ought to be struck down. No prior approval is required to be taken... The requirement of prior sanction is contrary to the object of the Act, and it forecloses inquiry and protects the corrupt rather than seeking to protect the honest and those with integrity who really do not require any protection," Justice Nagarathna said.
Justice Viswanathan said striking down section 17A will be akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water and the “cure will be worse than the disease”.
"Section 17A is constitutionally valid subject to the condition that the sanction must be decided by the Lok Pal or the Lokayukta of the State...
"The safeguard of this provision will strengthen the hands of honest officers but also ensure that the corrupt are brought to book. It will guarantee that the administrative machinery attracts the best talent for the service of the nation,"Justice Viswanathan said.
The case will now be placed before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for forming a larger bench to hear the matter for a final decision.
"Having regard to the divergent opinions expressed by us, we direct the Registry to place this matter before the Chief Justice of India for constituting an appropriate bench to consider the issues which arise in this matter afresh," the bench said.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the NGO, had argued that the provisions crippled the anti-corruption law as sanctions were not usually forthcoming from the government, which was the ‘competent authority’.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had appeared for the Union government.
