SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2390

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.I.ARUN, J.
Mahantesh Bilagi S/o Gurubassappa – Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Petition Nos. 11571, 11573 of 2025
Decided On : 02-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Vikram S. Huilgol, Leela P. Devadiga, Karthik N.
For the Respondents: Venkatesh S. Arbatti, Lakshmy Iyengar, C. Karthik

A trial court cannot order an investigation against public servants without prior approval as required by law, and mere allegations of misconduct in tender processes do not necessarily constitute criminality.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 175(3) and 175(4) - Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) - The petitioners sought to quash proceedings arising from allegations of criminal conspiracy and corrupt practices in tender processes by public officials. The court noted a failure to find criminality in the actions of the accused regarding the tender awarded to M/s. Rajashree Electricals. It emphasized that allegations did not necessarily indicate wrongdoing, and procedural safeguards were not observed per Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act for public servants. (Para 32)

(B) Findings indicated no unlawful enrichment of the petitioners or mismanagement of the tendering process. Allegations were deemed insufficient to establish any criminal conspiracy or misconduct as defined by law. (Para 30)

Facts of the case:
The proceedings stemmed from complaints regarding irregularities in a tendering process handled by BESCOM, alleging that the successful bidder was unfairly advantaged due to manipulations in tender requirements by the petitioners.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the material presented did not support a prima facie case of criminal conspiracy or corruption and highlighted the lawful processes followed.

Issues: The main questions revolved around the legality of the tender process and the sufficiency of evidence for prosecuting public officials.

Ratio Decidendi: The trial court was found to have erroneously ordered an investigation without adequate justification under the relevant laws governing public servant conduct, and the ruling was reversed.

Result: Petitions allowed, proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. introduction of parties and context. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. overview of allegations regarding tender process. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. details of infractions in the tender process. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. arguments of accused pertaining to procedural violations. (Para 10)
5. observations on public servant protections and procedures. (Para 12 , 20)
6. court's reasoning on allegations and lack of criminality. (Para 19 , 29 , 30)
7. final order of quashing proceedings. (Para 34)

ORDER :

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 23.07.2025 passed in PCR No.Nil of 2025 (now numbered as PCR No.24/2025) by the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH 82), accused No.1 has preferred Crl.P.No.11573/2025 and accused Nos.3 and 4 have preferred Crl.P.No.11571/2025.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.

3. Accused No.1 is the Energy Minister for the State of Karnataka and Chairman of Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM). Accused No.3 was the Managing Director of BESCOM and accused No.4 was a Director of BESCOM. Petitioners are Members of Legislative Assembly from the opposition party in the State of Karnataka.

4. BESCOM invited tender for selection of AMI Common Service Provider for Sale of Smart Meters to prospective consumers in BESCOM Jurisdiction on contract award basis in retail outlets for arranging power supply to new connections (including temporary installations) for a period of 5 years and Supply, Implementation, Commissioning & Maintenance of the common AMI System for Smart meters for a period of 10 years in all the ESCOMs of Karnataka. The same has been awarded in favour of one M/s.Rajashree Electricals Private Limited, Davangere. On the allegations that a criminal conspiracy was hatched at the behest of accused No.1 along with the other accused to favour the successful bidder in order to unlawfully enrich accused No.1, a private complaint has been lodged by the complainants by way of PCR No.Nil/2025, before the Special Court nominated to deal with criminal cases related to former and elected MP's / MLA's in the State of Karnataka. Before filing of the said private complaint, the complainants have approached the Lokayuktha Police and also sought permission from His Excellency, the Governor of the State of Karnataka to launch prosecution against the accused.

5. It is alleged that the entire tender process has been designed so that the contract is awarded in favour of the successful bidder (M/s.Rajashree Electricals Private Limited). It is alleged that there has been an illegality committed in framing eligibility methods of valuation and terms and conditions in the tender document. It is also alleged that there is a illegality in evaluation of bids. Illegality is also alleged in the final decision taken by the BESCOM in awarding the contract in favour of the successful bidder and also in incorporating the agreed terms and conditions in the contract.

6. The allegations against the accused made in the complaint are as follows:-

"8. The complainants submit that, it is to be noted that the following infractions were carried out by BESCOM's various committees and officials in the B.E.S.C.O.M smart meter tender to prop-up the prima facie shell of the criminal conspiracy M/s. Rajashree Electrical Davangere and keep other vendors out of the bid:-

I. The Tender value was reduced to Rs.997 Crores even though the actual value was more than Rs.5,296 Crores over a 10-year period.

II. The Estimated Annual Payment was reduced to Rs. 107.11 Crores even though the actual value was more than Rs.1,059 Crores.

III. Illegally & subjectively allowing and disallowing the use of credentials of sub- contracting to supplement the qualifying credentials or lack of it of the prime contractor. To ensure that other Nationally and internationally capable firms would not qualify to participate in the tender thereby, foregoing the need for Global Tenders to ensure bids were rest






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top