Delays in chargesheets for public servants cannot bar prosecution, and prior sanction is required for IPC offences but not for the Prevention of Corruption Act post-retirement.

JUDGMENT :

DIPANKAR DATTA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeals by the State of Karnataka register a challenge to the common judgment and order dated 5th July, 2022¹[impugned order] of the High Court of Karnataka²[High Court] in three Writ Petitions³[W.P. No.61305/2016 (GM-RES) c/w W.P. No.61306 of 2016 c/w W.P. No.61307/2016] filed by the 1st respondent – B.T. Ramesh⁴[Ramesh] under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973⁵[Cr. PC]. Vide the impugned order, the three writ petitions were allowed with the consequence that proceedings against Ramesh, in three complaint cases⁶[Special C.C. No. 252/2016, 253/2016 & 273/2016], stood quashed.

3. The occasion for filing three separate Writ Petitions before the High Court arose as three separate criminal proceedings (Special C.C. Nos. 252, 273 and 253 of 2016) were pending against Ramesh. In all such proceedings, a common chargesheet dated 3rd June, 2016 was filed, wherein Ramesh was arraigned as one of several accused.

4. Facts, in brief, necessary for the disposal of the present appeals are these:

a. From 15th February, 2008 to 15th January, 2011, Ramesh was working as Chief Engineer, Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike⁷[BBMP] (West) and had the power to grant technical sanction for works estimated between 30 lakh and 60 lakh.

b. On 26th March, 2009, Ramesh had granted technical sanction for asphalting of certain main roads and cross roads.

c. On 3rd November, 2011, the 2nd respondent⁸[The Commissioner, BBMP, N R Square, Bangalore] lodged a complaint alleging irregularities in execution of works by the office of the BBMP. No one was named in this complaint as an accused.

d. Next day, on 4th November, 2011, an FIR was registered against unknown persons on the basis of the said complaint under FIR number 4/2011 under Sections 420 , 406, 409, 465, 468, 471, 477(a) and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860⁹[IPC] and Section 23 of Karnataka Transparency Public Procurement Act, 1999.

e. On 31st May, 2013, Ramesh retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation.

f. More than three years after such retirement and almost four years and seven months after the lodging of the complaint, Crime Investigation Department (CID) filed a chargesheet in Crime No. 4/2011 (Special C.C. No. 252/2016) on 3rd June, 2016, wherein Ramesh figured as accused no. 6, under Sections 120(B), 409, 465, 468, 477 of the IPC r/w Section 13(1)(c) &(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988¹⁰[PC Act].

g. As per the chargesheet, Ramesh while serving as the Chief Engineer of BBMP at the relevant time was alleged to have colluded with the co- accused (other officer of BBMP and the contractor) in abusing his official position for adopting NH SR rates instead of the prescribed PWD SR rates for black-topping items. This resulted in the misuse of an additional sum in excess of Rs.22 lakh 40 thousand, thereby causing loss to the public exchequer.

h. Praying for quashing of the proceedings in Special C.C. Nos. 252, 273 and 253 of 2016, Ramesh presented the three Writ Petitions before the High Court on which the impugned order was