CAG report not basis for criminal action, High Court told

The counsel representing the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on Friday told the High Court that the CAG report is not a public document, but the property of the legislature.

The counsel said that the CAG report has to be submitted in both the Houses of the legislature and has to be examined by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). This report cannot be used as evidence to file criminal complaints as the report is used for making public policies. Only 23 chapters of the 2102 CAG report have been discussed in Parliament, the counsel submitted.

The counsel was submitting his arguments in the criminal petition filed by former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa seeking quashing of FIRs filed by the Lokayukta police against him regarding denotification complaints.

Yeddyurappa has contended that the complaints about denotification and subsequent FIRs filed by the Lokayukta are based on the CAG report and not on the PAC report which is normally placed before the floor of the House.

In the CAG report, it is said that the land has been denotified, but there is no mention that the land is illegal. Moreover, the CAG had to file details of the denotified land from 1995, but they have filed the report only from 2007 to 2011.

The petitioner has contended that the Lokayukta has filed the FIR only based on the complaint registered by Jaikumar S Hiremath. The counsel for Yeddyurappa has contended that FIRs cannot be filed based on the CAG report. Justice Rathnakala adjourned the hearing.

Details sought
In another petition filed by Yeddyurappa challenging former Governor H R Bhardwaj’s sanction to prosecute him in land scams, a division bench comprising Chief Justice S K Mukherjee and Justice Vineet Saran asked the petitioner’s advocate to file details of the case and several court orders in brief to the court.

On January 21, 2011, Bhardwaj had granted sanction to prosecute Yeddyurappa and others on the petitions by Sirajin Basha and K N Balraj over alleged land scams. The matter was adjourned to October 1.