Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1214/2025 of SHRI M THYAGRAJ Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 6 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:33686 CRL.RP No. 1214 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1214 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. M. THYAGRAJ, S/O D.M. MUNIRAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RETIRED
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1214 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1.
SHRI. M. THYAGRAJ,
S/O D.M. MUNIRAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
RETIRED CHIEF ACCOUNTANT
OFFICE OF CHIEF ENGINEER,
BBMP WEST ZONE, BENGALURU,
R/AT NO.62, 2ND MAIN ROAD,
BINNY LAYOUT, 3RD STAGE,
ATIGUPPE, VIJAYNAGAR 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560040.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BAJANTRI VIJAYKUMAR VITHALRAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY CRIME INVESTIGATION
DEPARTMENT (CID)/BMTF,
1, DR. A. KRISHNA RAO RD N,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
SAMAPNGI RAMANAGARA,
BENGALURU-560001,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP)
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF
CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 08.04.2025 PASSED BY THE 77TH ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR
PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, BENGALURU, IN
SPL.C.C.NO.253/2016 QUA THE PETITIONER HEREIN, VIDE
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State.
2. This Court in Crl.R.P.No.975/2024 and other connected with 115 cases dated 22.03.2025 having considered the matter in detail, taken note of the material available before the Court. While disposing of the revision petitions, this Court made it clear that all the criminal revision petitions are allowed. The order passed by the Trial Court in all the cases are set aside. The matters are remitted back to the Trial Court to consider the matter afresh in view of the observations made by this Court on merits. The Trial Court was directed to consider the sanction order given by the State to continue the
HC-KAR
proceedings against the accused where the proceedings have already been quashed by giving liberty to file sanction order and continue to proceed against them from the stage of taking cognizance. This Court also made it clear in the operative portion No.(iv) of the order that, if no such sanction is given in respect of the accused persons, which have been relied upon by the respondents, there cannot be any proceedings against those accused persons.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that there is no sanction against this petitioner in Special C.C.No.253/2016 and this petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.5, Sri M.Thyagaraj, S/o late D.M.Munirajappa, Chief Accountant Officer, Office of the Chief Engineer, National Highway, K.R.Circle, Bengaluru, formerly Assistant Controller (Finance), BBMP West Zone, Bengaluru, residing at No.62, 2nd Main Road, Binny Layout, 3rd Stage, Attiguppe, Vijaya Nagara 2nd Stage, Bengaluru-40. When there is no such sanction, the question of issuing the summons to the accused does not arise. The learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court issuing of summons to this petitioner vide order dated 08.04.2025 and the Trial Court
HC-KAR
issued summons to accused Nos.3 to 5, 7 and 8. The learned counsel would vehemently contend that continuation of proceedings against this petitioner does not arise in view of the specific order passed by this Court in Crl.R.P.No.975/2024 and other connected petitions.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent State took time to clarify whether there is a sanction against this petitioner. The learned counsel would submit that there is no sanction against this petitioner.
5. The order of this Court is very clear that if no such sanction is given in the respect of the accused persons, which have been relied upon by the respondents, there cannot be any proceedings against those accused persons. When such specific observation is made by this Court and also when there is no sanction against this petitioner, the question of continuing the criminal proceedings in Special C.C.No.253/2016 against the petitioner does not arise. Hence, the issuance of summons is hereby set aside and the revision petitioner is set at free in this
HC-KAR
proceedings in view of the detailed observations made by this Court in the earlier revision petitions.
6. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is disposed of.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16