The petitioner of the above cases is the former Chief Minister of Karnataka and all these petitions originate from a complaint lodged by one Jayakumar Hiremath before the Lokayuktha seeking action on the basis of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India’s report (‘C.A.G. report’ for short) in finding irregularities in the action taken by the petitioner and the coaccused in denotifying the various lands from acquisition.

2. The story commences from, Sri.Jayakumar Hiremath claiming to be a social worker, RTI activist and crusader against the corruption in the country filing a petition in W.P.No.15502/2013 (GMRESPIL) for a direction to the C.B.I. to conduct thorough investigation into various issues highlighted in the C.A.G. report No.6 of 2010-11 relating to Government of Karnataka on acquisition, denotification and allotment of land by the K.I.A.D.B. The Division Bench of this Court headed by the then Hon’ble Chief Justice opined that “. . . . . . the petitioner or any such public spirited person has an alternative and more appropriate remedy available to him in the form of provisions of Section 7 of the Karnataka Lokayuktha Act, 1984 and the Lokayuktha having also the power to investigate any action, the alternative remedy appears to be more appropriate for investigation of the grievances and allegations contained in the petition” and the petition came to be disposed of leaving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Lokayuktha for appropriate remedy. Another petition filed by the very same petitioner viz., Jayakumar Hiremath seeking action in respect of the C.A.G. report No.3/2012 in W.P.No.8347/2013 (GMRESPIL) was dismissed as not pressed.

3. In continuation of the above, the petitioner thereafter filed a complaint before the Lokayuktha to investigate the various issues highlighted in the C.A.G. report No.6/201011 and also C.A.G. report No.3/2012 relating to misuse of authority with corrupt motive and thereby causing heavy loss to the State Exchequer and to take further suitable action under law. In the said complaint, he referred to the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.15502/2013 D.D. 10.4.2013 and W.P.No.8347/2013 D.D. 28.6.2013. As could be seen from the undisputed documents placed on record, the Registry of the Lokayuktha on receiving his complaint in the prescribed form, registered the complaint. The names of the Officers involved were called for from the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka to take action against them. Since there was no response from the Government side, by invoking the provisions of Section 15(3) of the Karnataka Lokayuktha Act (‘the Act’ for short), the matter was referred to the Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Economic Offences and Special Units, for investigation and to report. It took almost one year for the DGP, CID to submit his report in the matter. The report also appears to have mentioned that, in respect of 35 cases pertaining to denotification of the land pointed out by the CAG in his report, the prosecution is already launched in some cases and some cases are pending in Lokayuktha Special Court. On the note put by the Registry, the Lokayuktha ordered on 11.6.2015 thus:

“Approved and officer in charge of investigation shall submit progress report through proper channel to ADGP every fortnight. ADGP shall ensure expeditious investigation.”

4. The Registrar of Lokayuktha handed over the reports to Superintendent of Police Wing, Lokayuktha, pursuant to which the Lokayuktha Police registered the above cases in respect of the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 the Karnataka Land (Registration on Transfer) Act, 1991 and Indian Penal Code (for brevity ‘the P.C. Act, K.L.R.T. Act and IPC respectively). Jayakumar Hiremath’S signature is found on the FIR also as the complainant. Annexed to the FIR are found, the complaint of Jayakumar Hiremath, the CIG report and case summary prepared by the Police Inspector.