Relief for Yeddyurappa as HC quashes all FIRs against him

Relief for Yeddyurappa as HC quashes all FIRs against him

FIRs cannot be filed based on CAG report, says court

Relief for Yeddyurappa as HC quashes all FIRs against him

 The High Court on Tuesday quashed all the 15 FIRs filed against former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa with the Lokayukta police in connection with denotification of land in and around Bengaluru city. 

Allowing the petition filed by Yeddyurappa, Justice Rathnakala in the order stated that FIRs cannot be filed based on the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). However, the bench said that the other contentions of the petitioner are kept open.

A private complaint was registered with the Lokayukta police by Jayakumar Hiremath, based on which 15 FIRs were filed against Yeddyurappa. First, three FIRs were filed, saying that land was denotified at survey number 251 in Halagevaderanahalli in Bengaluru South, survey numbers 5/1 and 6/3 in Bilekahalli and survey number 117 in JB Kaval.

The same bench had granted stay on proceedings based on the FIRs. Subsequently, 12 FIRs were filed, saying land was denotified at JP Nagar, HRBR Layout, Jayanagar 8th block, Rachenahalli and surrounding areas.

The CAG report said that denotifying land had caused loss to the State’s exchequer. Questioning the basis and seeking quashing of the FIRs, Yeddyurappa had approached the High Court. Senior counsel C V Nagesh, appearing for Yeddyurappa, had contended that FIRs filed by Lokayukta were based on the CAG report and not on the PAC (Public Accounts Committee) report, which is normally placed before the House to decide on the matter.

In the CAG report, it is said that the land has been denotified, but it is not said that it is illegal. He has contended that the FIR has not been filed as per Section 12 of the Lokayukta Act, which calls for a compliance report to be placed before the competent authority, who is the governor in this case.

‘Report not evidence’

Additional Solicitor General Krishna S Dixit, representing CAG, contended that its report was the sole property of parliament and that the sanctity of the report must be maintained and not misused by other organs of the State. The question whether the CAG report must be allowed for publication or not has to be decided in the House.

 This report cannot be used as evidence to file criminal complaints as it is used for making public policies.