<p>Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has quashed disciplinary proceedings against police inspector BK Kishore Kumar, who was accused of facilitating the sale of certain properties belonging to Pearls Agrotech Corporation Limited (PACL), despite a Supreme Court order prohibiting such sales without the approval of the Justice Lodha Committee.</p>.<p>The court noted that criminal proceedings against the inspector had already been quashed by a coordinate bench of the High Court.</p>.<p>The case was registered in 2022 when the petitioner was the inspector of the Attibele police station.</p>.<p>It was alleged that he, along with the other accused, facilitated the sale of certain properties belonging to PACL, which allegedly siphoned off Rs 49,000 crore in deposits made by 5.5 crore depositors. The FIR stated that the sales were facilitated despite the Supreme Court order prohibiting such transactions without the Lodha Committee's approval.</p>.<p>The FIR invoked IPC sections related to cheating, criminal conspiracy, and forgery, as well as Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.</p>.<p>On October 15, 2022, Kumar was suspended following the initiation of disciplinary proceedings.</p>.<p>Meanwhile, the High Court quashed the FIR and the order of taking cognizance against Kumar on the grounds of procedural infirmities and the absence of sanction under CrPC Section 197.</p>.<p>Kumar later challenged the suspension order and the initiation of disciplinary proceedings before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT). He moved the High Court after KSAT rejected his petition.</p>.<p>A division bench comprising Justice K Somashekar and Justice Venkatesh Naik T noted that the very basis for initiating disciplinary action — the criminal proceedings — no longer existed in view of the High Court's decision to quash the case.</p>.<p>Hence, the disciplinary proceedings and the suspension order cannot be legally sustained. As a consequence, the petitioner is entitled to all statutory benefits in accordance with the rules, the court noted.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has quashed disciplinary proceedings against police inspector BK Kishore Kumar, who was accused of facilitating the sale of certain properties belonging to Pearls Agrotech Corporation Limited (PACL), despite a Supreme Court order prohibiting such sales without the approval of the Justice Lodha Committee.</p>.<p>The court noted that criminal proceedings against the inspector had already been quashed by a coordinate bench of the High Court.</p>.<p>The case was registered in 2022 when the petitioner was the inspector of the Attibele police station.</p>.<p>It was alleged that he, along with the other accused, facilitated the sale of certain properties belonging to PACL, which allegedly siphoned off Rs 49,000 crore in deposits made by 5.5 crore depositors. The FIR stated that the sales were facilitated despite the Supreme Court order prohibiting such transactions without the Lodha Committee's approval.</p>.<p>The FIR invoked IPC sections related to cheating, criminal conspiracy, and forgery, as well as Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.</p>.<p>On October 15, 2022, Kumar was suspended following the initiation of disciplinary proceedings.</p>.<p>Meanwhile, the High Court quashed the FIR and the order of taking cognizance against Kumar on the grounds of procedural infirmities and the absence of sanction under CrPC Section 197.</p>.<p>Kumar later challenged the suspension order and the initiation of disciplinary proceedings before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT). He moved the High Court after KSAT rejected his petition.</p>.<p>A division bench comprising Justice K Somashekar and Justice Venkatesh Naik T noted that the very basis for initiating disciplinary action — the criminal proceedings — no longer existed in view of the High Court's decision to quash the case.</p>.<p>Hence, the disciplinary proceedings and the suspension order cannot be legally sustained. As a consequence, the petitioner is entitled to all statutory benefits in accordance with the rules, the court noted.</p>