In a big relief to senior IPS officer Hemant Nimbalkar, the high court on Friday quashed the FIRs, the prosecution sanction orders and the supplementary charge sheets filed against him in the IMA financial scam cases.
The CBI had first arraigned Nimbalkar as an accused in 2019 for allegedly approving a closure report. It registered another FIR against him last year under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The CBI's case was that Nimbalkar approved a closure report when he was an IGP between February 9, 2018, and July 10, 2019. The closure report was a virtual clean chit to the IMA, and it continued to run its Ponzi schemes.
Justice John Michael Cunha said that the sanction for prosecution, under Section 170 of the Karnataka Police Act, Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, was all illegal and invalid. As per the amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act, Section 17A prohibits any enquiry or investigation into offences committed by a public servant relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by him/her in discharge of official functions or duties.
The court noted that permission to conduct the enquiry under section 17 A (b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was given only on January 7, 2020, whereas the investigation had begun much earlier. The court also note that Nimbalkar's house and office premises were searched on November 8, 2019.
"As a result, the FIR registered against the petitioner as well as the consequent submission of the additional/supplementary charge sheet being violative of the provisions of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the sanction accorded for prosecution of the petitioner being illegal and invalid, no prosecution of the petitioner could be permitted to continue," the court ruled.
Insofar as the allegation of approving the closure report is concerned, the court said, the material on record shows that it was an institutional decision taken by the CID.
"Notings clearly indicate that the decision to close the enquiry was taken collectively by the police officers and indicate that it was an institutional decision taken by the concerned police officials, right from SP to DG based on the legal opinion obtained from the legal advisor," the court said.