Karnataka HC sets aside Siddaramaiah govt order withdrawing 43 criminal cases

The Karnataka High Court, on Thursday, set aside a state government order directing the public prosecutors to withdraw as many as 43 criminal cases filed against persons including politicians and influential persons accused of various offences including rioting, attempt to murder, trespassing, and attack on officers on duty, stating it was a breach in law – section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code and that the state government had “exceeded its authority” and “undermined” the public prosecutors’ discretionary powers by its order to withdraw the cases.

 

The opposition BJP welcomed the court’s verdict and said it was “slap” on the face of the Siddaramaiah government for withdrawing criminal cases, playing politics of appeasement and under political pressure.

 

Interestingly, the beneficiaries of the now impugned (case withdrawal) order include BJP’s Union minister (MoS) Railways V. Somanna, MLC C.T. Ravi and former minister M.P. Renukacharya, state Higher Education minister Dr M.C. Sudhakar, two MLAs B.R. Yavagal and U.B. Banakar, former MLAs S.A. Ravindranath, Sanjay Patil, Veeranna Charanthimath, Anil Benake, Dr S. Siddaiah and other politicians like Gujarat MLA Jignesh Mewai, farmers from Shivamogga, Haveri, Uttara Kannada and Bagalkot districts and their leaders Kurubur Shanthakumar, H.R. Basavarajappa and Chukki Nanjundaswamy, dalit and Kannada activists. However, the potential beneficiaries also included the accused in the April 2022 Hubballi riots that saw stone pelting at Old Hubballi police station over an “offensive” social media post. This was opposed by the BJP leaders.

 

“At least now, the Siddaramaiah government must rein in anti-social elements in the society and stop protecting the goondas among the Muslims. The ruling party must focus on building a robust law and order system to protect the common man,” BJP state chief B.Y. Vijayendra said.

 

“The state cabinet should work in the interest of the state. The Congress government had withdrawn the cases owing to political pressure and appeasement politics. The government must take action against those involved in DJ and KG halli riots,” said former chief minister Basavaraj Bommai.

 

A division bench of Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice K.V. Aravind while pronouncing its order, allowed the public interest litigation filed by Bengaluru-based advocate Girish Bharadwaj questioning the government order and said, “Petition is allowed, the government order dated October 15, 2024, is hereby set aside and it is declared that the order shall stand non-est since inception, consequences in law will follow.”

 

The section 321 CrPC states that the public prosecutor (PP) or assistant public prosecutor in charge of a case may, with the consent of the Court, at any time before the judgment is pronounced, withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of any one or more of the offences for which he is being tried.

 

Advocate Venkatesh Dalwai appearing for the petitioner had argued that the government had no role to play in withdrawing the cases. It is the public prosecutor who has to decide. So far, as this Section (321 CrPC) is concerned, the role of the state government is not contemplated so far as withdrawal of cases as held by the Apex court in several cases".

 

The petitioner had submitted before the court that several cases had been registered across different police stations between 2008 to 2023 and of these cases, only 43 cases involving highly influential personalities were selectively withdrawn.

 

The court which issued a notice to the government also said, “The learned advocate for petitioner is prima facie justified that the government has been exerting pressure on the prosecutors in ordering them to withdraw the cases which is a clear violation of Sec 321 CrPC. When the Department of Prosecution and law have opined cases are not fit for withdrawal, the state government has exceeded its authority to pass the impugned order. A strong prima facie case is made out.” 

India