High Court chides Lokayukta for delay in disposal of corruption cases

As if the allegations of impropriety within the Lokayukta institution were not enough, the anti-graft watchdog has now come under severe censure from the High Court for delay in disposing of corruption cases. 

Unhappy over the snail-paced disposal of cases at the ombudsman’s office, the High Court on Wednesday ordered the Lokayukta officials concerned to be present before it at the next hearing. During the hearing of a petition, the counsel for the Lokayukta submitted three volumes of cases pending before the anti-graft watchdog. 

At a previous hearing, the court had directed the Lokayukta to furnish the list of cases which are pending at various stages. 

Accordingly, the counsel submitted that there are 1,722 cases awaiting trial, 882 cases under investigation and 105 cases pending for want of sanction for prosecution from the government. 

Justice A N Venugopala Gowda remarked thus: “Will you be able to retain the evidence after this delay? Whether the evidence will be available? Do you think the witness will support the case? One day is sufficient for erosion of evidence. There should not be any such incident.” 

When he learnt that a case about a raid conducted on a government official in 1996 is still pending, the judge thundered: “Is he (the accused) still alive? Thank God if he is. It is a big thing if he is still alive.” 

When the Lokayukta’s counsel submitted that the matter had been sent to the government for sanction to prosecute the accused, the court observed: “Do you think he will not indulge in corruption again? Once he has tasted a sweet do you think he will refrain from it again? Don’t you have sufficient powers to regulate? Is it humanely possible for the court to monitor investigation regularly?” 

The court expressed concern that in some cases of corruption, the accused have opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS). “Some have left the service by taking VRS and you are yet to complete the probe. Aren’t you people guilty of wasting public time?” 

When the counsel for Lokayukta argued that the court fix a time frame for disposal of the cases, Justice gowda said that he could not give such a  direction. “The court does not have such powers. The lacuna has been brought to light. You must open your eyes now. We can only check whether it is correct or not. You cannot expect us to make laws,” he observed. 

The bench described as “alarming” the fact that a whopping 406 cases were pending in Bengaluru alone. It has directed the High Court Registry to keep the contents submitted by the Lokayukta about pending cases in a sealed cover.