Corruption complaint against KAS officer filed 7 years after alleged incident quashed

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has quashed the proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act against a Karnataka Administrative Service (KAS) officer as it found the complaint was filed seven years after the alleged incident. LC Nagaraja is a senior scale officer of the KAS who is presently working as an administrative Officer, Sakala Mission, Bengaluru.

He joined government service in 1988 as a food inspector. The complaint against him was filed on February 16, 2022. However, the alleged incident of corruption dates back to 2014. It pertained to a land dispute in Vaddarapalya village in Bengaluru South Taluk and the High Court had directed the parties to approach the Assistant Commissioner in the year 2014.

Basavarajau M, one the parties in the property dispute alleged in his 2022 complaint that Nagaraja, who was the AC then demanded Rs.6 lakhs to pass an order in his favour. Basavaraju also claimed that he had paid Rs.2 lakh on March 15, 2015.

The complaint was filed before the Aniti-Corruption Bureau which is now handled by the Lokayukta police after the former was merged with the latter. Nagaraju approached the High Court against this complaint and the case is pending before a Sessions Court. Senior Counsel AS Ponnanna argued the case for Nagaraju while the Special Public Prosecutor BB Patil appeared for the Lokayukta.

Justice M Nagaprasanna in his judgement on October 17 said that the complaint was not maintainable. “After 7 years, narrating the incidents allegedly happened in the year 2015 a complaint comes to be registered on 16-02-2022. There is no reason even to the minutest recorded in the complaint as to why the complainant kept quiet for seven years and narrating every incident that happened either in the year 2015 or 2016 the complaint is registered.

Immediately thereafter, a crime is registered for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner by a disgruntled complainant who has lost his case before the quasi judicial and judicial for a and after about 7 years of such loss seeks to set the criminal law in motion. There is no explanation forthcoming for the delay.”

The HC said that there is mala fide intention behind the complaint. It accepted AS Ponnana’s citation of an earlier Supreme Court judgement. “The complaint, on the face of it, is mala fide. Even the recording that the complainant narrates is from the year 2016, which is six years ago.

The facts narrated would undoubtedly lead to an unmistakable conclusion that the proceedings are instituted with an intention which is mala fide and if the institution of a proceeding is itself mala fide, permitting further proceedings on such mala fide action would run foul of the Apex Court judgement in State of Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal,” the HC said.