Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Serious allegations of corruption demand thorough investigation Against Karnataka Bar Council Chairman:  Karnataka HC Refuses to Quash FIR

28 September 2024 11:55 AM

By: sayum


Karnataka High Court in Criminal Petition No. 3666 of 2024 dismissed a plea to quash an FIR filed against Vishal Raghu, Chairman of the Karnataka State Bar Council, and others for allegedly misappropriating funds during a State Level Advocates' Conference in Mysuru. Justice M. Nagaprasanna ruled that the allegations, which involve misuse of public funds, require a full investigation, rejecting the petitioners’ attempt to have the criminal proceedings quashed.

The FIR was filed following allegations by S. Basavaraj, another member of the Karnataka State Bar Council, that funds amounting to over Rs. 3.2 crore were misappropriated during the Advocates' Conference held in August 2023. Basavaraj's complaint alleged fraudulent payments to non-existent vendors and the creation of fake bills. Despite internal resolutions and an audit, the complainant insisted that a proper investigation was necessary, leading to the FIR and subsequent court proceedings.

The key issue was whether the FIR, filed under Sections 120B, 403, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, and 477A of the IPC, should be quashed at the preliminary stage. The petitioners, including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Bar Council, argued that the funds were spent following resolutions passed by the Council, and that there was no misappropriation.

Justice Nagaprasanna, however, held that the case involved serious disputed facts that required thorough investigation. The Court highlighted the complainant’s evidence, including voice messages and receipts, suggesting that large sums of money were paid in cash without proper documentation. The Court emphasized that such allegations, especially in cases involving corruption, should not be dismissed without allowing the investigation to proceed.

The Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Kaptan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which cautioned against quashing criminal proceedings when serious factual disputes are involved. Justice Nagaprasanna ruled that the petitioners’ claims of resolutions and internal settlements could not justify preemptive dismissal of the investigation. The Court dissolved any interim relief granted earlier and allowed the investigation to continue.

The Karnataka High Court's decision underscores the importance of allowing investigations in cases of alleged corruption, especially when substantial public funds are involved. By rejecting the petition to quash the FIR, the Court affirmed that such matters must be thoroughly examined through proper legal channels.

Date of Decision: September 27, 2024

Vishal Raghu & Others v. State of Karnataka

Latest Legal News