Karnataka High Court rejects plea by Congress' DK Shivakumar against CBI probe in disproportionate asset case
Justice K Natarajan held that the order, despite mentioning the word 'sanction', was a simple executive order granting consent and hence, did not require application of mind.The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a plea by Karnataka Congress chief DK Shivakumar challenging the Karnataka State government's decision to grant permission to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the alleged offences committed by him under the Prevention of Corruption Act [DK Shivakumar vs State of Karnataka and Ors.]
Justice K Natarajan observed that although the assailed order mentioned the word 'sanction', the order itself was only a simple executive order giving consent to CBI under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.
"Though in the impugned order it mentioned as sanction was accorded but literally it is only a consent and it is not a sanction and it is only a simple executive order by giving consent to the CBI for investigating the matter as against the petitioner," the Court stated.
Senior Advocate Uday Holla for Shivakumar contended that the State government had not applied its mind to the order according sanction to the CBI.
He argued that there must be adequate reasons to grant sanction to the CBI to probe the case and underlined that while passing the order, the government simply narrated the contents of a letter issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and referred the case to CBI, which registered the FIR.
On the other hand, Special Public Prosecutor for the State government argued that the order passed under Section 6 of DSPE Act is not a sanction order but is only a consent given to the CBI to investigate the matter.
Therefore, he contended that the order was a simple executive order and did not require detailed reasons for according consent.
The First Information Report (FIR) against DK Shivakumar was registered on October 3, 2020 alleging that his assets increased disproportionately from 2013 to 2018.
According to the FIR, Shivakumar and his family had possessed movable and immovable assets worth ₹33.92 crore in April 2013, but by 2018, they had acquired assets valued at ₹128.6 crore, bringing their total assets to ₹162.53 crore as of April 30, 2018.
Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in M Balakrishna Reddy vs Director, CBI, New Delhi and a judgment each of the Karnataka and Madras High Courts, the Court held that the assailed order passed by the State government was nothing but a consent given by the State under Section 6 of the DSPE Act and not a sanction as required under Sections 17 or 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Hence, stating that the order did not require application of mind, and even otherwise was passed by the government after considering the letter by ED, the Court dismissed the plea to quash the order.
