Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

"High Court Rejects Quashing Plea in Disproportionate Assets Case, Emphasizes Timely Investigation"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of FIR in a disproportionate assets case, highlighting the importance of timely investigations. The case involved Dr. Kallappa, a former university professor, who had been under investigation for alleged misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the case, observed, "The delay has occasioned due to the petitioner not divulging numerous accounts held by him. Unearthing of those accounts by the prosecution is one of the reasons for delay." The court noted that such delays can lead to a lackadaisical attitude on the part of the prosecution and adversely affect the rights of the accused.

Dr. Kallappa's petition argued that the pending criminal proceedings were preventing him from applying for the post of Vice-Chancellor, and therefore, the proceedings should be quashed. However, the court rejected this plea, emphasizing that the delay was, in part, due to the petitioner's failure to disclose all relevant information.

The judge stated, "The petitioner is required to set his house in order by directing completion of investigation within a time frame, failing which the Damocles sword of prosecution will always be hanging on the head of the public servant."

The High Court ordered the Lokayukta, the anti-corruption ombudsman in Karnataka, to file its final report within two months from the date of the court's order. It warned

Date of Decision:   August 10, 2023

KALLAPPA vs THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Latest Legal News