Disposed

Victor Simon v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Mar 2023WP/4243/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition under Article 226 challenging the nonconsideration of representations by the Karnataka Lokayukta regarding the petitioner's explanation for alleged accumulation of wealth under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The court disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider the petitioner's representations dated 09.01.2023 and 25.01.2023 and not to precipitate the matter pending such consideration. Costs to petitioner.

Victor Simon Vs State of Karnataka — Corruption | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - WP No. 4243 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 4243 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VICTOR SIMON, S/O RABINDRA SIMON, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WORKING AS POLICE INSPECTOR, COASTAL SECURITY POLICE, (UNDER LIEN PERIOD)UDUPI. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF A 604, KPR ELITE APARTMENT, KASVANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, KAIKANDRAHALLI VILLAGE, BENGALURU 560 035.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶14

KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE.

¶15

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE/ INVESTIGATING OFFICER, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,

¶16

¶17

WP No. 4243 of 2023

¶18

DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT.NAVYA SHEKAR., AGA FOR R1; SRI. B B PATIL.,ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R- 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09/01/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-D TO THE WP, AND TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25/01/2023 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WP.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The short grievance of the Petitioner is as to nonconsideration of his representations dated 09.01.2023 & 25.01.2023 respectively at Annexures-D & E whereby he claims to have offered an explanation for the alleged amassing of wealth for which investigation is undertaken under the provisions of Sec.13(1)(b), Explanation (i) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that unless the explanation is considered and found to be not plausible, the act complained does not partake the character of an offence and therefore it is incumbent upon the respondents to

¶25

¶26

WP No. 4243 of 2023

¶27

consider the explanation offered, in terms of subject representations.

¶28

Learned Panel Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 having opposed the petition for some time, now fairly agrees to instruct his clients to look into the grievance of petitioner as is aired in the subject representations in accordance with law and in a time bound manner. This is appreciable.

¶29

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed off directing the respondents to consider the representations, and till after such consideration takes place, the matter shall not be precipitated. All contentions are kept open.

¶30

Costs made easy.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Snb/

Victor Simon v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Victor Simon v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramananda Nayak Vs the District Registrar and Registrar

Shivappa Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

Sri Sidlingappa Vs State of Karnataka

Madhuri P. Kagi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.C.Lokesh Vs Mahila Co. Operative Bank Limited

Sri Narasimhegowda Vs the Special Land Aquisition Officer