Supreme Court Dismisses Karnataka Dy CM DK Shivakumar's Plea To Quash CBI's Disproportionate Assets Case
The Supreme Court today (July 15) dismissed Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar's petition challenging a High Court order, whereby his plea to quash the Central Bureau of Investigation's disproportionate assets (DA) case against him under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) was rejected.A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma heard the matter.Senior...
The Supreme Court today (July 15) dismissed Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar's petition challenging a High Court order, whereby his plea to quash the Central Bureau of Investigation's disproportionate assets (DA) case against him under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) was rejected.
A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma heard the matter.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Shivakumar, submitted that the investigation has commenced without obtaining the sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He further contended that the issue whether Section 17A applies to offences allegedly committed before the 2018 amendment (which inserted Section 17A) is referred to a larger bench [Ref. Chandrababu Naidu case]. However, Justice Trivedi replied that the proceedings cannot be quashed based on a split verdict. Rohatgi stated that he was merely requesting for issuance of notice on the petition.
However, the bench expressed disinclination. Justice Trivedi noted the allegation that Rs. 41 lakhs were recovered from Shivakumar. Rohatgi clarified that it was an allegation in the proceedings under the Income Tax Act. He argued that there could not be a CBI FIR on the very same issue. Disagreeing, Justice Trivedi said that the case was related to a separate offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Income Tax authorities cannot prosecute under the PC Act, the judge added.
Notably, the bench also expressed its disapproval of the High Court's order for staying the sanction accorded to CBI. "How can High Court stay sanction? This is unheard of...", Justice Trivedi said. On this aspect, counsels for Shivakumar informed that the Karnataka government has withdrawn the consent accorded to CBI.
To recap, the Income Tax department had carried out a raid in August 2017 at various premises of Shivakumar in New Delhi and other places. It collected a total of Rs.8,59,69,100, out of which Rs.41 lakhs were allegedly recovered from Shivakumar's premises.
Subsequently, a case was registered against Shivakumar before the Special Court for Economic Offences under provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Based upon the income tax case, ED also registered a case and Shivakumar was arrested on September 3, 2019.
On 09.09.2019, ED issued a letter to the Karnataka government under Section 66(2) of PMLA. Following the same, sanction against Shivakumar was accorded and the matter referred to CBI for investigation.
Shivakumar moved the Karnataka High Court challenging the sanction and proceedings against him. In April, a single judge bench dismissed his petition, but during the course of the hearing, granted the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee chief temporary relief by staying the CBI probe on multiple occasions. The single judge's dismissal led Shivakumar to file an appeal before a division bench.
The interim orders were challenged by CBI through a special leave petition, but the Supreme Court in July refused to entertain the agency's plea arising out of 'purely interlocutory' orders.
Subsequently, in October, the top Court issued notice on a plea by CBI challenging Karnataka High Court's June 2023 order which stayed investigation against Shivakumar in the disproportionate assets case. This plea was ultimately dismissed on 10th November, however, the High Court was requested to consider the application filed by CBI for vacating the stay granted and the appeal pending before it preferably within 2 weeks.
Thereafter, the Karnataka government withdrew consent accorded to CBI and the High Court permitted Shivakumar to withdraw his petition challenging the consent to prosecute him.
Counsels for DK Shivakumar: Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi & Vipin Sanghi; Advocates Mayank Jain, Madhur Jain, Parmatama Singh, Arpit Goel and Aakriti Dhawan
Case Title: D. K. SHIVAKUMAR VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DIARY NO. - 47121/2023